Hacker News Reader

Art done well may not be my cup of tea, but it is entirely fair to hate on something if it is just called art by a lazy person. Smearing colors on a paper is what kids do. Adults should be able to produce something that is actually something.

Art that does not give the intended feeling, idea, or understanding is not worth the name art.

View on HN

I still think that is a subjective take. Who defines "lazy" and since when can art not be lazy? Should the process by which art was created have any bearing on how the final expressed form is experienced?

The banana duct-taped to the wall could be considered "art by a lazy person", yet at the same time, it was actually a very authentic expression (in this case, an expression that was more along the lines of satire). The "artist" was having an internal experience that he chose to express as a banana on the wall with a piece of duct tape. The artistic expression was a social statement, a joke, a protest. And that's ok.

I think there is an exception to satire because good satire has to take on the form of what it mocks, and therefore you can't make an epic painting.

The hard work of satire is figuring out the best way possible to make the satire.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com