Artist who “paints” portraits on glass by hitting it with a hammer
simonbergerart.com
simonbergerart.com
The technique is cool though.
It’s like there are 2 axes: - cool technique and - cool picture. The second is way more important than the first, which is way painters are still on top of the 2D art world.
Some people can do both though. And i’d say even in these cases the art world tend to dismiss the weird technique as gimmicky.
You've just got the sausage, and there's (not necessarily) any indication of how it was made inherent to the sausage - even if the way the sausage is made is cooler than the sausage itself.
(that analogy got tiresome quickly)
Damien Hirst is a more polarizing third contender.
Edit: also Yayoi Kusama
Cheap 4K dash cams are awesome at creating the wackiest noise in suboptimal lighting conditions.
Yeah, art is only real if it is unpopular and elicits a “I don’t get it” /s
And the wonder of it is that we can all have different responses to the same thing. (The Mona Lisa is a waste of canvas and oil - a hill I will die on).
Seems like Mona Lisa elicits an emotional response in you as a viewer ;)
I get what you're saying though. I always "correct" people that claims some piece of music is "bad", there's no bad music, only music you don't like.
If it's shallow and uninspired, why not make a better version? The medium is freer than Free Software. A sharpened hammer, a pane of laminated glass, and some time.
How hard can it be?
$$$$$ for supplies, you could probably take up oil painting for cheaper.
Bigger panes of laminated glass is expensive, but you can start small, no? I'd go to the local glass shops and ask for their scraps, for example.
However, the point is not the cost of the supplies, but supporting the argument by putting out something better than the thing being criticized.
It can be valid to criticize something as uninspired even if you're not capable of doing it yourself. Movie critics would have a hard time otherwise.
In this case I wouldn't be quite as dismissive, personally. But if you've seen one, have you seen them all? Probably yes.
It can easily be said that this makes no sense, because the yeller has no idea of the tremendous work that even the lowest-tier athletes put into their vocation.
On the other hand, they are a “customer” of the athlete, and have a “right” to criticize the “product.” They are probably out of line, suggesting root causes and solutions, but they aren’t out of line for complaining about their experience with the product.
I wrote a short piece about this mindset, some time ago: https://littlegreenviper.com/problems-and-solutions/
> but they aren’t out of line for complaining about their experience with the product.
They are just as asshole, as much valid as me mocking random people on the street.
2.) Like common, it is even fairly common for people to pay literally nothing to anyone and watch professional sports for free.
3.) Those who are paid are NOT paid by the watchers at all. Not even by the TV itself. Their actual employers are multiple steps away from broadcaster.
> if not through subscriptions or tickets, then just by watching the ads on tv.
That makes them products themselves. They are not paying by watching ads, their time is sold to the real customer who is whoever paid for ads.
Go to a scrapyard and see if you can pull the windscreen out of a car. It's just a contaminant when it goes in the fraggie anyway.
I 100% guarantee you have criticized things without trying to produce better work yourself. It is a deeply dishonest standard.
The exhibitions section [0] has examples of abstract pieces of art too.
I bet nobody here saw the art from the submission in person but look at how many opinions around.
Every time I hear armchair critique of someone else’s “boring uninspired art” and “expressionless faces”, or “art connoisseurs” giving snippets of wisdom, I know they’re fuller of hot air than a desert on a hot summer day.
One thing I'm hoping for if AI destroys much of the value of soulless art, is human actual art reverting to the motivation of the desire people have to share things with those they love.
That's ok, not all art affects all people the same and to me that's the wonderful thing about art – it really is ok to have different opinions and taste, no one is wrong. I'll just move on to the next piece and hopefully enjoy that more. :o)
In this case, that's not true. See the examples shared by https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47163837 on this page.
See also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47162666 for context.
It looks like the cracks are same on all 4 sheets. That is amazing. Their are only 4 pictures though. I want to see them more closely.
Edit: while looking for more photos found more work here. The 3D effect by layering sheets is so cool. https://aurum.gallery/simon-berger/ I like the sphere more than the skull.
Edit: Found some more pictures of those sheets with same cracks in his Instagram https://www.instagram.com/p/C_34-G0K-Qm/?igsh=MWtzY2FydWQxa2...
https://museemagazine.com/features/2018/10/15/walead-beshty-...
For better or worse, he’s mostly know in the “street/urban art” world (which is much bigger than graffiti). And one of the features of a lot of the art in that scene is high technical mastery paired with “low” / populist motifs and composition.
Seen up close these works are really quite amazing, and I respect the artist choosing to make the things that can make him a living. Even Brice Marden, at some point, just kept making those trademark squiggles and cashing those checks.
That's an interesting distinction. I hadn't really noticed that but it makes a lot of sense.
I suppose Banksy would be close to the crossover point between those two worlds? The ideas and the chutzpah are the main attraction, but generally 'low' populist motifs, without high technical mastery. Someone you could either look up to or sneer down on from either side.
As clever as his art is, I think he's still very much an outsider in the capital-W Art World, which for his part he's often trying to prank. (Which they richly deserve, see Exit Through the Gift Shop.)
Things like the self-destroying painting were high-concept but also completely staged. For another artist getting rich off his contempt for the Art Market, but solidly on the Art World side of the fence, see Maurizio Cattelan.
One person with a foot in both worlds is Alex Face but he's mostly known in South-East Asia. I have a feeling it'd be easier to find examples in Asia than in the West.
(stereotyping a HN commenter that doesn’t understand humor)
Not to dismiss the rest of the world, but my focus was on the western side, not so sure how it goes in other parts of the world.
Technique is undoubtedly interesting, but content....
Interesting to consider how different mediums are mechanically reproducible to varying degrees as AI and automation grow more capable.
Interestingly, I think this HN topic is very relevant to understanding of contemporary LLM hype, as it illustrates the power of language (and propensity of human mind) to create an appearance of substance and meaning even where there is absolute emptiness (or, worse, manipulative fraud) underneath.