Cool/Weird Art Movements You've Found

[Punp]

cool but this pipe painting is so fucking stupid i bet if the guy who made it was a millenial he would post le epic random quirk chungus >reddit shit its just nonsense its not even funny or thought provoking its just stupid and 'hahaha so zany' but its not its stupid

I'll bite. Your view is loaded with presentism. Of course it's a simple perspective at the base of everyone's understanding - because it was one of the first explorations of the concept of an image starting the modern philosophy of "what is real" vs the "hyper real". Early Dadaism was chock full of this commentary about art. Simulacra and Simulation by Baudrillard wasn't written until the 1980s, and yet Rene Magritte simplifies and presents the concepts in five words and a painting of a household item in 1929.

"Fucking retarded cavemen inventing the wheel - we already have cars" type energy.

By the way, where do y'all find the HQ artworks and artists similar to who you already like? Sometimes it's a great pain in the ass to find a version of the painting I've enjoyed that is not 600x400 pixelated mess, and then to find any stylistically similar pics. Would love to hear about any useful online resources, like archives, catalogues, etc. I occasionally use wikiart.org, but it's far from perfect, and archive.org has one of the shittiest search systems I've ever encountered, so you often can't find anything of what you actually need inside piles and piles of useless info.

Put the image into google reverse image search. You can filter by "highest resolution", and the search has become so fuzzy and shitty now that you can just search through "visually similar images" to find something new.

---

An art style I really like is lego city townscape. There are only a few places that do it well - mostly in old lego marketing but also some modern fan photography, but it involves blue skies, paper hills in the distance and brightly coloured, simple red, yellow, black, white and blue buildings. There is often a simple yet absurd storyline that fits alongside involving creative building using available bricks. It is best exemplified by the 1979 lego ideas catalogue 3000.

 

[scattershot]

NATO wave is cool but I discovered it through the hellsite known as >reddit so that at least half's its coolness

It's kinda tiny, and inactive, but its fun and jets and tanks and aircraft carriers are the sexiest machines

 

[GENOSAD]

NATO wave is cool but I discovered it through the hellsite known as >reddit so that at least half's its coolness

View attachment 129568
View attachment 129569
View attachment 129574
It's kinda tiny, and inactive, but its fun and jets and tanks and aircraft carriers are the sexiest machines

I've seen this before with YouTube edits... Honestly, I kinda like how it's a spin of Sovietwave/Fashwave, but with the "good guys" instead. Sure, it's just another >Muh militaristic ideology!! aesthetic, but there's something about adopting badass visuals we associate with former enemies that just goes hard to me. Also just war edits in general...

 

[scattershot]

I've seen this before with YouTube edits... Honestly, I kinda like how it's a spin of Sovietwave/Fashwave, but with the "good guys" instead. Sure, it's just another >Muh militaristic ideology!! aesthetic, but there's something about adopting badass visuals we associate with former enemies that just goes hard to me. Also just war edits in general...

idk if it's a gender thing or what but most men ive encountered have at least some sort of fascination with weapons of one sort or another. I am not an exception.

Military tech has always been on the frontier of human achievement, for better or worse. Since clubs and gunpowder to F35s, nuclear subs, etc. I guess cause it's the simplest way to impose / protect your will onto other humans?

I haven't heard of sovietwave/fashwave. I guess it's time to jump down another rabbit hole! Ty

 

[Punp]

I haven't heard of sovietwave/fashwave. I guess it's time to jump down another rabbit hole! Ty

I wouldn't. It's basically a gateway aesthetic to writing essays on the downfall of the west and retvrn to tradition.

Fashwave stuff is as good as banned on the forum because it was attracting morons.

 

[Yajuu-senpai]

It's not an art movement in the traditional sense but interesting nonetheless.
Dazzle camouflage, or "razzle dazzle" for Americans, was used in both world wars and after. First utilised by the British, it's supposed to confuse enemies with its irregular shapes instead of being used to hide. They are supposedly inspired by animals' fur patterns, such as those of zebras

 

[TheGr8Whoopdini]

cool but this pipe painting is so fucking stupid i bet if the guy who made it was a millenial he would post le epic random quirk chungus >reddit shit its just nonsense its not even funny or thought provoking its just stupid and 'hahaha so zany' but its not its stupid

How very >reddit of you, in oh-so-ironic turn, to take this holier-than-thou attitude toward such an artistic trailblazer. You can only take it for granted because he granted it to you in the first place—as though you were the proverbial fish not recognizing the postmodernist water in which you swim.

 

[penguinblanket]

How very >reddit of you, in oh-so-ironic turn, to take this holier-than-thou attitude toward such an artistic trailblazer. You can only take it for granted because he granted it to you in the first place—as though you were the proverbial fish not recognizing the postmodernist water in which you swim.

 

[Knows He Knows Not]

To be fair to him and others like him over the pipe piece, Dadaism lead to nothing of any quality, and its most famous artist Duchamp was attempting to not only say art was useless, but kill it entirely (he even left art entirely to go play chess till the day he died). Now you may ask why I'm talking about Dada when the pipe piece is not technically Dada, its because it is very much in line with the ideology and overall movement. Much like performance art or urinals in a museum, the message of the piece is all that matters, usually in a very meta or referential way. Put a pipe on a canvas and say it is not a pipe, put a snow shovel on a wall and declare it as art. Both are about attacking your perception of art, not about making any sort of beauty or meaning.

While I think a lot of times the people who attack modern art are unintelligent and lacking knowledge, I think they also seem to be much more honest in their intuition than most others who do have that knowledge. One might intellectually reason that Duchamp's Trébuchet is "equal" to Laocoon in a subjective outlook, but if we were to be more sincere, I think it is just faux-intellectualism that only served to justify a lot of really terrible art.

 

[Punp]

To be fair to him and others like him over the pipe piece, Dadaism lead to nothing of any quality, and its most famous artist Duchamp was attempting to not only say art was useless, but kill it entirely (he even left art entirely to go play chess till the day he died). Now you may ask why I'm talking about Dada when the pipe piece is not technically Dada, its because it is very much in line with the ideology and overall movement. Much like performance art or urinals in a museum, the message of the piece is all that matters, usually in a very meta or referential way. Put a pipe on a canvas and say it is not a pipe, put a snow shovel on a wall and declare it as art. Both are about attacking your perception of art, not about making any sort of beauty or meaning.

While I think a lot of times the people who attack modern art are unintelligent and lacking knowledge, I think they also seem to be much more honest in their intuition than most others who do have that knowledge are. One might intellectually reason that Duchamp's Trébuchet is "equal" to Laocoon in a subjective outlook, but if we were to be more honest, I think it is just faux-intellectualism that only served to justify a lot of really terrible art.

You couldn't be more wrong if you had actively tried. Duchamp's work is in recontextualising every day objects. His art is in curation, not creation, and provokes users to look at objects from a new perspective.

In the way John Constable reflected the beauty of a simple hay wain through paints, Duchamp reflects the beauty of every day objects by presenting them directly as an object to be seen and observed. As we move from nature towards a man-made reality invaded by commercialism, manufacture, the virtual, and media narrative, artists have little option but to draw from what they see, comment on it and recontextualise it.

This would later be echoed in culture jamming, remix culture and later still in vaporwave - using and repurposing original material to explore its beauty.

Duchamp's urinal is ikebana for the modern world.

A lot of Dada era work was made for the sheer fun of it by amateur artists. The playfulness allowed for rules to be broken and boundaries pushed, and in a competition for controversey and defeating the status-quo, the urinal comes out on top.

The fact that we're still talking about it a century later is evidence that Duchamp's work was critical, astute and to the point.

 

[Knows He Knows Not]

You couldn't be more wrong if you had actively tried. Duchamp's work is in recontextualising every day objects. His art is in curation, not creation, and provokes users to look at objects from a new perspective.

In the way John Constable reflected the beauty of a simple hay wain through paints, Duchamp reflects the beauty of every day objects by presenting them directly as an object to be seen and observed. As we move from nature towards a man-made reality invaded by commercialism, manufacture, the virtual, and the narrative, artists have little option but to draw from what they see, comment on it and recontextualise it.

This would later be echoed in culture jamming, remix culture and later still in vaporwave - using and repurposing original material to explore its beauty.

Duchamp's urinal is ikebana for the modern world.

A lot of Dada era work was made for the sheer fun of it by amateur artists. The playfulness allowed for rules to be broken and boundaries pushed, and in a competition for controversey and defeating the status-quo, the urinal comes out on top.

The fact that we're still talking about it a century later is evidence that Duchamp's work was critical, astute and to the point.

And yet Duchamp himself called art worthless masturbation and went to go play chess for most his life after he felt he had completed his mission to kill it. As I said, its common to intellectualize Dada and performative/meta art, but ultimately you are left with someone putting snow shovels on a wall to make fun of the very people willing to take it seriously, just as Duchamp intended. The true irony here is that of the both of us, he would be on my side and not yours, yet you are his defendant and I am his prosecutor.

 

[Some_porcupine]

is this going to be the same thing as with Nietzche? ("yes you no")

 

[Punp]

And yet Duchamp himself called art worthless masturbation and went to go play chess for most his life. As I said, its common to intellectualize Dada and performative/meta art, but ultimately you are left with someone putting snow shovels on a wall to make fun of the very people willing to take it seriously, just as Duchamp intended. The true irony here is that of the both of us, he would be on my side and not yours, yet you are his defendant and I am his prosecutor.

A mountain landscape is not art and therefore needs no observation. God has declared it so; he's moved onto other projects.

 

[Knows He Knows Not]

A mountain landscape is not art and therefore needs no observation. God has declared it so; he's moved onto other projects.

When you are willing to add enough context and explanation to your posts you can make a new one tackling my post. As it stands right now I could interpret this in any way I see fit, only leading to miscommunication as I am forced to fill in your thoughts for you.

 

[Punp]

When you are willing to add enough context and explanation to your posts you can make a new one tackling my post.

If you read the post in context with the one it is responding to and the wider conversation, it is succinct and direct, but if I'm going to have to dictionary-define every word for you I think we can both do without the conversation. I don't care enough.

On the original topic of art movements: Ikebana. The art of Japanese flower arranging. The part I like most is that it embraces the concept of wabi-sabi (wabi: less is more, sabi: attentive melancholy) - an awareness of the transient nature of earthly things and a corresponding pleasure in the things that bear the mark of this impermanence*. In my own words: shit is impermanent and petals fall down, observe it and enjoy it. It is like speed running bonsai.

 

[Knows He Knows Not]

I don't care enough.

You "don't care", yet wrote this post and cried in the chatroom for many more posts, which is also where you admitted to being a bad-faith actor while thinking I wasn't looking there:

Punp: My responses are just getting shorter and more powerful
Punp: The trick is to set up a series of traps and then let them write massive paragraphs

Maybe what you mean is that you "don't care" to have a coherent point since you couldn't figure out a proper position to take. Feel free to run away, I can't force you to make a real point.

 

[Punp]

You "don't care", yet wrote this post and cried in the chatroom for many more posts, which is also where you admitted to being a bad-faith actor while thinking I wasn't looking there:


Maybe what you mean is that you "don't care" to have a coherent point since you couldn't figure out a proper position to take. Feel free to run away, I can't force you to make a real point.

>me, literally crying and pissing

I don't care enough to argue with you about why an artist, making art, and posting it to an art gallery, and then needing to make 14 replicas for people who wants to own his art, isn't making art because he said he isn't in a statement after he ditched his career as an artist because it was "intellectual masturbation" in order to [checks notes] chase a career in chess (lmao). I genuinely mean it when I say I do not care about arguing for a man who worked before the second world war who died several decades before I was born. It's Tuesday and I have not slept enough to give you a good faith argument, and from my previous experiences interacting with you there will be no actual discussion or revelation, only "but the artist said it's not art so therefore it's not art". Like, okay bro. You got me. Here's your big medal for winning the argument both factually and on a debate platform basis.

Please excuse me while I run away from your facts and logic. It is not because you are irritating to interact with, or that your opinions read like a bleached gradeschool essay; it's because I have nothing else to do with my time online, and you make such strong points that I can't refute them.

You won, genuinely. Have a good day at work.

 

[Punp]

I am genuinely being the worst part of this forum. I need to log off for the day.

 

[Vitnira]

To be fair to him and others like him over the pipe piece, Dadaism lead to nothing of any quality, and its most famous artist Duchamp was attempting to not only say art was useless, but kill it entirely (he even left art entirely to go play chess till the day he died). Now you may ask why I'm talking about Dada when the pipe piece is not technically Dada, its because it is very much in line with the ideology and overall movement. Much like performance art or urinals in a museum, the message of the piece is all that matters, usually in a very meta or referential way. Put a pipe on a canvas and say it is not a pipe, put a snow shovel on a wall and declare it as art. Both are about attacking your perception of art, not about making any sort of beauty or meaning.

While I think a lot of times the people who attack modern art are unintelligent and lacking knowledge, I think they also seem to be much more honest in their intuition than most others who do have that knowledge. One might intellectually reason that Duchamp's Trébuchet is "equal" to Laocoon in a subjective outlook, but if we were to be more sincere, I think it is just faux-intellectualism that only served to justify a lot of really terrible art.

The above quote posted on a forum about vaporwave

 

[Knows He Knows Not]

>me, literally crying and pissing

I don't care enough to argue with you about why an artist, making art, and posting it to an art gallery, and then needing to make 14 replicas for people who wants to own his art, isn't making art because he said he isn't in a statement after he ditched his career as an artist because it was "intellectual masturbation" in order to [checks notes] chase a career in chess (lmao). I genuinely mean it when I say I do not care about arguing for a man who worked before the second world war who died several decades before I was born. It's Tuesday and I have not slept enough to give you a good faith argument, and from my previous experiences interacting with you there will be no actual discussion or revelation, only "but the artist said it's not art so therefore it's not art". Like, okay bro. You got me. Here's your big medal for winning the argument both factually and on a debate platform basis.

View attachment 132071
Please excuse me while I run away from your facts and logic. It is not because you are irritating to interact with, or that your opinions read like a bleached gradeschool essay; it's because I have nothing else to do with my time online, and you make such strong points that I can't refute them.

You won, genuinely. Have a good day at work.

So you "don't care", yet wrote this entire whiny essay full of nothing but insults and a strawman (for I never said anything was not art, only that the results of critique-based meta pieces attacking the perception of Art itself were of a lower quality nature), and you even dedicated time to making an entire image in a fit of anger. Indeed if you are "too tired" for a good faith argument (yet lively enough for this essay and image) then perhaps take a nap, or wait till the next day before responding. This is a forum - the conversation isn't going anywhere, and as a moderator you should know this best, just like you should know not to openly flame people upon first contact with them like you did in a previous thread.

What standard is being set by you right now as a moderator? Flame people, start arguments while shitalking them behind their back in the chatroom, write out excuses like "I'm tired" for admitting your bad faith rhetoric and actions, make images that are again just flame because you are upset by the conversation? You are no moderator, you are a frustrated child having a public meltdown.