Here’s a test of artistic brainpower. Who painted the picture below? Anybody know? Anybody know for sure? Is it something any high school art student could forge without any serious difficulty? What do you think that same high school art student would come up with if he were trying to forge an Ingres painting? Note that master artist David Hockney can’t even make a reasonable approximation of an Ingres drawing. Do you know who David Hockney is?
Does anyone think that the drawings below come within a country mile of an Ingres drawing? Does anybody think a bonehead declaring that the Old Masters used camera lucidas to make their paintings by demonstrating they did so by using a camera lucida to make the drawings below is in his right mind? Does anybody think that a student applying to the French Academy where Ingres was an instructor wouldn’t have been laughed out of the room? Does anybody think… period?
Not that I know a damn thing, but to my eye these drawings are so stunningly inept one can only think Hockney is suffering from serious brain damage if he thinks they come close to an Ingres drawing. They don’t even come close to first year student of Ingres. And the art world takes this theory seriously? How stupid are the people in the art world to not fall over laughing at Hockney’s absurd theory? Anybody want me to elaborate on just what a thoroughly stupid theory it is or is the comparison enough?
Are there any artists who think that Hockney’s drawings bear even a remote resemblance to the Ingres drawings below? If you do, you should choose a profession more suitable for your intellect and talents. Starbucks barista, perhaps. Just a suggestion.
It’s a simple fact that an artist with the incredibly low drafting skills of a David Hockney couldn’t remotely compete in the popular art world with, say, Kim Jung Gi who one can note is making these flawless drawings spontaneously. He is not using a camera lucida, David. Neither was Frans Hals. It takes a kind of stellar stupidity to
And what are we supposed to think it is that makes Hockney’s work so superior to artists like JungGi exactly? His work is completely banal and trite, which is the essence of Pop Art.
Do people in the fine art world actually think that the drawing below by Jung Gi, which is a page taken from one of his sketchbooks…
is inferior to Hockney’s typically mediocre Pop illustration work:
But the art world takes seriously an artist who clearly has such an extremely poor grasp of drawing and thinks he has even the vaguest notion of how the Old Masters worked? I read his book Secret Knowledge and anyone with any basic understanding of drawing, much less painting, could take it apart page by page. Hockney has no idea whatsoever what he is talking about, and neither does the art establishment that cherishes him and the vast field of mediocre artists that inhabit it. We’re at a point where people consider something art if it is made by people who don’t know the first thing about drawing. People who don’t have the discipline to learn to draw. People who have no vision whatsoever and nothing whatsoever to say. If I saw that Hockney painting above or any of his dog paintings in a coffeeshop I wouldn’t go in the door regardless of how good the coffee was. And I do see paintings like that all over the place. What kind of farce has the art world turned into when paintings like the one above that barely rise to the level of the amateur efforts adorning coffeeshops and art fairs galore are considered the works of an immortal master selling for tens of thousands of dollars?
And how gutless are the denizens of the art world to not take a piss on the David Hockneys and Jeff Koons who have turned art into a pathetic and stinking joke.
I know I’m not talking to anybody as people in the art world don’t have the brains of that dachsund, if it even is a dachsund. Who the hell can tell what it is. Hockney couldn’t even get a job painting pet portraits if that’s the best he can do. And, sadly, it is the best he can do, as the art world has let painfully stupid shit like this become the norm. Yes. I know… People love Hockney. They just love Hockney.. They just love Andy. They just love Keith. They just love Norman Rockwell. So those guys must be genius level artists. How could tens of millions of Americans possibly be wrong.
Tens of millions of Americans also love targets… Let’s move on to one of the greatest abstract painting geniuses (first declared so by Clement Greenberg and rubber stamped by every major museum in the US.)
Anybody know who painted this particular target? Think your 14 year old would have trouble forging it? Or if you’re 14 years old do you think you could forge it? Would it be a lower or higher bar to forge than the Hockney painting above?
Did the same guy paint this next target? Is it from the same period as the first one? Is it better or worse than the first one? Is it the same? What would make it a better or worse painting?
And this next target? Same painter? Different painter? Is it a painting? Is it a digital print? Is it better or worse than the other two? Can you imagine an artist showing one of these paintings to Ingres while declaring he’s one of the greatest painters of the time? Can you imagine Ingres not thinking him stark raving mad? Do you think that the criteria and principles of artistic excellence change from one century to the next and that Ingres was fine for his century but David Hockney dachsund and Target paintings are the height of artistic accomplishment for our century?
Do you think at all? Are you one of those great thinkers patterned after Marcel Duchamp like John Baldessari or Vito Acconci (i.e., the cerebral artists who have put art back in the service of the mind, that is) whose work consists of something like moaning under some constructed stairs as you masturbate or feign masturbation. Do you have a brilliant mind like Arthur C. Danto’s that falls prostrate before the genius of Marina Abramovic dancing with Jay Z at Pace Gallery? Do you think that Bob Irwin’s empty rooms or Bruce Nauman’s videos of empty artist studios precipitate a profound level of consciousness in you when they’re viewed? How stupid are you? Are you a genius like Marcel Duchamp? Is that why you’re part of the Cognoscenti, one of the rare Enlightened Ones who get true art while morons like myself think it’s a total fraud.
How about this next work of art? Who painted it? Looks better to me as it’s more simplified and gets down to the real essence of the target, just like Malevich and Mondrian got down to the real essence of painting. None of the masses of cluttered-up junk one sees in Renaissance painting or Dutch Masters. Does this one give you the same kind of profound experience you get with a Jasper Johns or a Kenneth Noland Target? Or Dan Flavin fluorescent tube? If you see a Dan Flavin fluorescent tube at the National Gallery is the experience more profound and moving than if you set up the exact same fluorescent tube arranged identically in a cleaned out room of your McMansion? Or is it the price tag that gives you the hard on?
Do you think that in the year 2050 when all these bullshit art magazines along with the drivel written in them has crumbled into dust that people are going to be in ecstasies over paintings of targets? Do you think there’s any significant visual difference between one target and another outside of choice of colors, materials, etc? You think a painting of a target has something to do with a painting by Manet or van Gogh? Do you think a painting of a target is better than a Saturday Evening Post cover by Norman Rockwell? Do you have any serious criteria for what constitutes art and what doesn’t?
Do you think that in 50 years time someone in an art gallery faced with tens of thousands of target paintings, logos, etc. is going to think some of them vastly superior to a Norman Rockwell painting? Let’s think about it.
There are target paintings and logos galore. Why? People like them… They just love targets with different color. Ask any archer… Ask a guy throwing darts in a pub. Does art have any remote relationship to how many people like or don’t like it. Obviously not. Look at painters considered worthless for hundreds of years like Rembrandt, George de LaTour, della Francesca, Caravaggio, Vermeer whose value becomes clear for whatever reasons at some point in history, and one can easily imagine opinions changing continually over time into the future.
Because Pop Art is considered the apex of Western Civilization today does anyone with a speck of intelligence think that this estimation will prevail unaltered when a different wealthy elite than that of today takes the reigns? Personally, I expect there won’t be any art around at all in 2050 as we’ll have totally collapsed by then. Where would that 2050 Contemporary Art go anyway? Would it be put into MoMA, Whitney, and thousands of other Contemporary Art spaces that stand now? Then what happens to all the Koons, Minimialism, Photorealism, Video Art etc. that are now housed there. Does anybody with a speck of intelligence think that in 2050 people are going to be going to MoMA to watch Nauman’s Clown Torture or a video of his empty art studio that plays on for hours? I imagine that technology will be so old and outdated people won’t even recognize what it is.
Speilberg is already complaining about the people at Cannes all hot on the new virtual reality movies. Oh no! This is the end of the great Cinematic Masterpieces like E.T. and Indiana Jones! Spielberg calls it a “dangerous medium“. Poor baby. Spielberg is suddenly a nonentity with the new breed. His immortal classics will have about as much interest to the people of 2050 as a silent Harold Lloyd film that had audiences wowed in the Olden Tymes has for the audience at Cannes today. All this time he had dreamed that films with the intellectual heft and import of Jaws and Jurassic Park were filled with such deep and universal meaning they would last down the ages?
Go backwards in time. What would D.W. Griffith with his Birth of a Nation which the New Yorker called “disgustingly racist” have made of the pious Liberal sentiments of Stephen Spielberg and New Yorker devotees. Even Rupert Murdoch denounced D.W.s love song to the KKK. Who’s to say that in 2050 the KKK won’t be back in style? If Trump’s elected they could be back in style next year for that matter. Gotta stop the Donald! Vote for Commander Hillary who will keep the savages in line who threaten us from Moscow to Beijing to Tehran to the shores of Tripoli. One can always count on a liberal to bomb whoever their military advisers tell them to bomb. Plus Hillary is thoroughly approved of by the Neocon elite like Dick Cheney, who set the sterling example of how to handle foreign policy that she and Obama have enthusiastically used as a model.
But frankly, my dears, who really gives a damn in the art world as what’s most important is High Art of the David Hockney variety which will liberate our minds and take us to those sublime places where the bombing and street fighting won’t trouble our serenity as we contemplate how cute and lovable dachsunds are… just like David Hockney himself. So by all means, pick up for 25 dollars or whatever Art Forum is charging the numbskulls to buy one nowadays and delight in all the fabulosity. See if you can make the next immortal and unbelievably stimulating light sculpture experience. Put some real naked people in it blowing each other. That hasn’t been done before as far as I know. That should be a real breakthrough into hypersexualized sublimity that even Robert Mapplethorpe and Tracy Emin combined couldn’t deliver.
Incidentally, do you know who the painter was who painted the work above? Hint: He’s hardly known at all. Van Gogh liked him. Painted his garden. How pathetic does it have to get before any of you knuckleheads has the cojones to make a little baby peep about just how ridiculously stupid a Cy Twombly or Alex Katz or Philip Pearlstein are compared to a painting like that above or even an ink drawing by the artist who admired him so.
Van Gogh was great. The Barbizon School was great. They all learned from the tradition as it was passed down and extended it. Then came the urinal and the fucking shitheads with their pomposity and ignorance came to town. Look at them cavort… So exciting.