weLL yES OBVIOUSLY WHO WOULDN’T
I really should make a bunch and sell them.
weLL yES OBVIOUSLY WHO WOULDN’T
I really should make a bunch and sell them.
Kurobas characters tropes : Daiki Aomine
He needs one thing more than anyone else on the team. An opponent every bit as good as him. A true rival.
you say love triangle i say threesome
A much more accurate “now” image for direct comparison would be a photograph. Abstract art came about as a direct result of the invention of photography, as paintings no longer need to be representative, as photographs are inherently better at that task. Accurately representative paintings were just the photography of the pre-photography era. Portraits of nobility have been replaced by Sears Portrait Studio. Self portraits have been replaced by Instagram selfies. Paintings of historical events have been replaced by photojournalism. Photography is the democratization of art and abstract paintings and sculpture are the most evolved form of art possible. These are not things to complain about.
YES YES IT IS okay i have a whole lot of feelings about abstract and non-representational art
because yeah, once photography became more common and widely available, people who painted started to question what they painted for. They started to wonder what made something art, what distinguished a painting from a photograph - if photographs could depict “objective” reality (insofar as such a thing even exists), then maybe the strength of painting lay in what photography, in that day and age, couldn’t capture, like feelings or impressions or the tricks the eye plays when seeing an object.
and so they asked, well, why does this portrait feel so comfortable and warm and this one feel threatening and stiff? what elements of the picture suggest that? is it the lighting? the way people are posed? can you play up those elements, exaggerate them, make the figures express the feeling instead of the other way around? what would happen if you did?
and for that matter, people continued to ask, why do we find a certain change of lighting comforting? why do we respond to someone wearing a red shirt or a blue dress differently to someone wearing a white one? what is it about red? or black? or green? why does the shape that people are standing in, the way the figures are placed in a frame, change how we feel about it?
art in a way started to become about psychology - it became about thinking and about why we think and how. because photographs (again, at the time) weren’t engaging with that nearly as much, art started to move towards a “why” of photographs. why that pose? why that color?
that’s when you start to get art like the one under “art now”, right, because look at it. REALLY LOOK, okay, don’t just shrug and walk away because “anyone could do it”. look at that exact shade of orange. do you ever see just a big swath of one color in nature? no, you see hints of it. where have you seen it? what does it remind you of? for that matter, what about the little stripes on it? does that make you feel like there’s depth to the painting - something inside it? why? after all, the painting is a flat plane*, so if you do get a sense of depth from it that’s your brain interpreting signals its familiar with. isn’t that incredible, that all it takes is a few little lines on a single color? isn’t it strange how one person will see depth and another won’t?
*and for that matter it ISN’T a flat plane, there are variations in the height of the paint on the canvas and how much it’s built up, and it protrudes slightly from the wall instead of being recessed into it - does that do anything to the sensation of depth? while we’re on that note, do you ever look at a representational painting and think about how you, the viewer, are looking into it and see it as having space and depth when it really doesn’t - only it does, but not the same space and depth as is represented in the picture?
and that’s without even getting into larger cultural shifts like the World Wars - and it’s hard to overestimate the effect that WWI and WWII had on even the “mainstream” art world - and the greater voice of underrepresented and oppressed groups like women, POC, and LGBT artists and the increasing technological sophistication of photography and the advent of video and widely-available audio recording and the increasing use of galleries to display art rather than private residences and it is still art, okay, representative art is art too but that doesn’t mean this isn’t it’s just focusing on something different and if you dismiss non-representational art as lazy or a con i will sit your ass down in the nearest chair and yell at you about marcel duchamp for an hour
I have a lot of feelings about this, so I’m gonna just spew them everywhere.
Most critically! The red piece isn’t art now. It’s art 60 years ago — 1950, they great heyday of abstract expressionism in the USA! All that abstract shit you hate, all that stuff that’s just splatters and giant dots? 1950-1960. The United States. A small, elitist movement shaped by maybe a dozen artists and two or three very influential critics. In a decade abstract expressionism had pretty much said all there was to say about the action of painting and the canvas as an object rather than a representation, and it got stuck in the museum for people to be bewildered at.
The Rembrandt piece above it? Also a snapshot of a very particular time and place. Our view of art 400 years ago is blinkered by what we’ve bothered to preserve and focus on. When people think “old-timey art” they think of bright white marble statues with no limbs and Da Vinci and Dutch still life. Which is such a tiny fraction of things that have happened in art history, you know? That’s like, three things! Most of them done for rich dudes in Western Europe!
I call such bullshit on someone trying to knock down all of contemporary art by comparing something made for the cultural elite in 1650 to something made for the cultural elite in 1950.
Art is huge, poorly defined, and it has always been that way, has always had elements that are democratic and has always had a thick vein of nasty elitism. The carvings on the doors into Notre Dame tell the stories of the saints so that everyone could understand them, whether they had access to books or not. Comic books and photorealism and murals in urban areas and fashion spreads — all this stuff is made to wow everyone, independent of how much time they’ve spent studying the deep philosophical circle-jerk of art criticism.
I love art criticism, I love Frank Stella and Ad Reinhardt and Eva Hesse, and I am still incandescently furious when people try to reduce the evolution of art to simply justifying or condemning their work. Because that means we’ve fallen head-first into the trap of omission and framing that keeps art defined as only for the museum-attending. There’s museum art — cerebral and obtuse and annoying and demanding of effort and education and money to appreciate — and then there’s literally a whole world of more art. It is an appalling disservice to all the other artists making it out there (corporate designers and media hubs and scrappy little collectives and crafters and professional illustrators) to sweep them under the rug in favor of arguing about museum art as if it is the most important art, or, worse, the only art.
Don’t like Barnett Newman? Fuck Barnett Newman. Fuck his arrogance and his inaccessibility and his ego and his concept of the primitive.
But fuck you if you call him “Art now” while you do it. Don’t make one man the measuring stick for a century of modern creative works. That’s a bullshit premise and you know it.
While Abstract art (with a capital A) is obviously a movement of modern art, abstraction in art has existed since forever.
Cycladic marble sculpture from 2500 BCE resemble modern cubist abstract forms (they could be Alexander Archipenko pieces), because abstraction wasn’t always an artform in response to photography, it was first used as an expression of the divine. With recognizable features and expression wiped clean, the human form was abstracted to represent the different deities and figures of worship.
So it’s a misconception to think of abstraction as a modern, linear development in the canon when it existed long before Rembrandt’s Night Watch above.
reblogging for commentary
Pacific Rim tropes → Stacker Pentecost
Don’t mind me I’m just a freaking Slenderman-esque creature haunting you behind your back
Dreams (feat. Gabrielle Aplin)
Bastille feat. Gabrielle Aplin | Dreams (Fleetwood Mac cover)
THOSE MAKO TAGS, WHY. :(
MY UGLY UGLY UGLY UGLY FEELINGS
SASHA SHOWING MAKO HER MAKE-UP COLLECTION AND TESTING TO SEE WHICH SHADE OF FUCK-YOU IS PERF FOR MAKO’S SKIN TONE
THE WEI’S PLAYING TOUR GUIDE FOR MAKO IN HONG KONG, SHOWING HER TO THE KING OF SNAKES NOODLE JOINT AND HU COMING UP WITH THE BRIGHT FUCKING IDEA TO TAKE HER TO AN UNDERGROUND MMA MATCH AND MAKO EATING AN EGG WAFFLE IN WAX PAPER WITH ONE HAND AND CHEUNG IS JUST MUTTERING IN SHANGHAIESE THE WHOLE WAY DOWN THE TWISTY STAIRS we’re gonna die we’re gonna die marshal is going to find out and he will murder us all and since I am oldest by half an hour, he will bring me back to life just to murder me AGAIN
THE JESSOPS AND MAKO EXPLORING TOKYO TOGETHER BEYOND THE SHATTERDOME THREE AM IN THE MORNING AND KAORI AND MAKO HAVE THEIR ARMS AROUND EACH OTHER’S WAISTS IN A 7-11, STOCKING UP ON JAPANESE CANDY AND SNACKS AND PACKAGED RAMEN BECAUSE MAKO HAS BEEN TELLING KAORI, LISTEN, THERE IS NOTHING IN ANCHORAGE, SEATTLE AND LA, YOU CAN FIND STUFF, BUT ANCHORAGE? FORGET IT. NOTHING.
MAKO SITTING IN THE KWOON, KNEES UP TO HER CHEST, WATCHING PANG AND AN GO AT EACH OTHER WITH FOILS AND MAKO SMILING UP AT THE CEILING WHEN AN HELPS PANG OFF THE FLOOR, AND MASKS OFF, AN PULLS PANG TO HER FOR A GOOD LONG KISS
THE TUNARI’S WHO HAD COYOTE TANGO AFTER AND THEIR JOKES ABOUT THEIR JOB BEING KEEPING THE OLD GIRL TOGETHER LONG ENOUGH FOR MAKO TO HAVE HER AND REMEMBER THAT TIME STACKER TURNED THIRTY? MAKO WANTED STACKER TO HAVE A SPECIAL BIRTHDAY AND TO HAVE ALL THE PEOPLE HE LOVED AROUND HIM, BUT TAMSIN WAS IN A BAD SPELL IN HONOLULU, AND THEY WERE IN MANILA, AND YOU CAN’T SEND PERSONAL FREIGHT ON THE SHATTERDOME SHUTTLE JETS ANYMORE SO
TENDO GOT RANGER P. ARTY HAT BILLETED ON THE NEXT FLIGHT FROM MANILA TO HONOLULU, AND THE TUNARI’S ESCORTED RANGER P. ARTY HAT ALL THE WAY TO THE HOSPITAL IN AN OFFICIAL PPDC JEEP AND THAT WAY, THAT WAY, WHEN STACKER WALKS IN THROUGH DOOR,
TAMSIN IS THERE TOO ON THE COMMLINK, WEARING RANGER P. ARTY HAT (PURPLE, BLUE AND GOLD RIBBONS UP TOP), AND MAKO HANDS THE WORKPAD TO STACKER AND SHE SAYS, HAPPY BIRTHDAY, STACKS, YOU’RE OLD NOW AND WHEN HE POINTS OUT THAT SHE IS ACTUALLY OLDER THAN HIM, TAMSIN CUTS HIM OFF BY BLOWING A PARTY HORN AT HIM WHICH SETS OFF A WHOLE SERANADE OF PARTY HORN BLOWING BY THE TUNARI’S WHO ARE ALSO WEARING SILLY PARTY HATS WITH THE ELASTIC UNDER THE CHIN AND THEIR DRESS BLUES AND MAKO IS NOT TOO OLD, AT THIS POINT, TO SNUGGLE UNDER STACKER’S ARM AND LEAN UP AGAINST HIM AND SMILE AT TAMSIN THROUGH THE COMMLINK SHE IS SO PROUD AND FOR A LITTLE WHILE, STACKER IS SO FUCKING HAPPY
MAKO MORI SAYS
mari’s FIVE DAY drawing challenge!!!!! draw a self portrait once a day, like you’re a character in a different work of popular fiction!!!
- day one: harry potter
- day two: pokemon
- day three: the hunger games
- day four: supernatural
- day five: FANDOM OF YOUR CHOICE
i think this junk is a lot of fun and a great exercise, especially if you’re havin artist’s block y’know. a cool study in what makes those universes unique and an act of imagination trying to find how you’d fit into them. do it!!! go for it!!!!
even if you aren’t involved in any of the first four fandoms it could be a lot of fun!!!!
if you do it, tag it #mari’s drawing challenge so i can check it out, yo
Took a stab at a little update to Gambit’s 90s costume here— and then got wicked carried away with rubble :p