Will you London litizens go to the royal academy to enjoy this?

Will you London litizens go to the royal academy to enjoy this?

Sure I'll go.

Identity politics is hot garbage.

many of the more famous works of art by female abstract expressionists is in Denver right now, where they're having a show exclusively dedicated to them. stupid to get irritated by that, though, because it's widely believed by art history scholars of all gender identities that the female abstract expressionists works were less substantial and more derivative than their male counterparts.

>Will you London litizens go to the royal academy to enjoy this?
Were there even any good female abstract expressionists?

What a retarded complaint. Also Pollock is based.

helen frankenthaler, maybe one or two others
but you don't come to see those, nobody does except for a couple of misguided militants, Rothko is the only thing worth taking away from this movement imo

i don't think Rothko is even remotely as interesting or significant in the grander scheme of Pollack, who ended up being maybe the second most influential artist of the latter half of the 20th century after Duchamp.

Influence doesn't matter. Pollock was a pathetic neurotic stuck on a roundabout, Rothkos spiritual meditations are the only american expressionist paintings that approach serious art, I believe.

>Pollock was a pathetic neurotic stuck on a roundabout
and this has little or nothing to do with his art, which is great.

You must be joking, it's the meaning of his work

All his paintings are self-conscious wrecks, he couldn't paint when he couldn't get his dick up, proverbially or even literally
Can really recommend Robert Hughes series on American art - American Visions, it's on youtube

Has anybody been to see the Jeff Koons exhibition at Newport Street Gallery?

>crammed in a room with the big men
N-no thanks...

i'm aware of his personality, but are you aware that we're talking about paintings?

UUUU

Are you aware that paintings are painted by painters?

you gotta separate the art from the artist. the fact is that pollock's work is sublime.

i will never go to a koons exhibition again. cannot in good faith give money to any institution that supports him in any significant way.

>sublime

I find it perplexing that someone with critical thinking skills, especially one with an appreciation for literature, could react to Abstract Expressionism with anything but dismissal.

a lot of it is beautiful; that's all that matters.

lol. don't have any idea what you could possibly mean by this? you seem to be implying that there's some sort of objectivity present in 'critical thinking'?
'dismissal' in the arts isn't even a good way of conceptualizing a way to respond to it. extremely juvenile.
i know that most people on Veeky Forums have ridiculously conservative world views due to a lack of exposure to the world and general autism, but this is a really myopic way to respond to something so incredibly complicated, which is essentially the end point of a specific narrative of painting up to that point, dating back to the beginning of civilization etc. not only that, but it opened certain doors for postmodernism in the arts, and etc, etc etc.

that's not fucking true.

Yes it is.

it's definitely not.

bad post

Why?

:^)
because that type of art is significantly less about aesthetics than it is about the manifestation of ideas and various other things. 'emotional power,' 'expression of the individual,' 'pushing the boundaries of painting,' etc etc. appreciating it aesthetically is the absolute bottom level of understanding or appreciating it.

well i disagree. i appreciate the aesthetics of it more than anything else.

then you are probably living an extremely myopic life.

ok

art is art. i like what is beautiful to me.

>Rothko

But senpai, this is shit.

>So what are you using your art history degree for?
>shitposting on the chans and being condescending to people who tell me that the emperor is, in fact, not wearing any clothes.

its great

this looks like pepsi

might do. i go to most of the big art exhibitions in london.

although if i was strapped for time and could only go to one, i'd be more likely to choose the Beyond Caravaggio exhibition at the National Gallery

It's free, but why?

Joan Mitchell was pretty good imo

>you gotta separate the art from the artist
I'll take Art after 1850 for $2000, Alex.

Rothko is one of my favourite artists

>""""modern art""""

Yeah, nah.

>but muh figurative art is superior
Learn to appreciate abstraction.

why the " "? are you implying they're not art?