note: this is just a little rant (i was bored), so don't take it too seriously

Modern “Art”?

A white box tipped to the side. A red line painted onto canvas. A big, pink shoe in a room of red. What do these all have in common? They’re considered “art.” Of course, the meaning of “art” is different to different people. For those who are more interested in artists such as Michelangelo, they would go to art museums to see paintings with messages, historical value, etc. For those who are more interested in modern artists like Kim MacConnel, they would go to see a painting of circles and squares.

I would fit in the first category. If today’s society views art as something a kindergartener would scribble onto a wall, then I think that we are close to loosing all artistic morale. In fact, I could probably find a bashed up milk carton from the trash and sell it to a modern art museum. Art is supposed to be something that moves you. Whether it’s two- or three-dimensional, you should be able to look at it and see meaning and value. Great artists can (re)create people with realistic facial expressions and skin so fine that you can see the veins. They can paint a waterfall real that it seems you can almost reach out and touch it. The sun may even be warm when they have a meadow and flowers. Only a person incredibly gifted and skilled can do such a thing. A modern artist, however, will only have a solid color running through everything.

Not that I mean to degrade those who would prefer modern art – people can have different tastes – but it seems that they are more one-layered. There isn’t much to see when all you have to look at is a whole bunch of boxes stacked on top of each other. If it is something that anybody could do, it should not be something to be displayed with singularity.

So, reconsider those boring visits to art museums: What is it that you see? What do you think of it?