Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: RegulatorCountry
He (Andy Warhol) was an artist and what he produced was art,

No. "Defining an era" does not make one an artist. If someone can produce something that anybody, with effort, can produce. then that is not art.

A true artist produces something that is rare and not commonly arrived at.

You or I could do what Warhol did, if we cared to put in the effort and got enough people to call it art. We could not do what Monet did, or to overuse an example, Michelangelo.

That is my definition of art.

11 posted on 12/26/2017 9:33:25 AM PST by bagster (Even bad men love their mamas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: bagster

Warhol remains controversial but there are far more who disagree than agree with you, as far as whether his efforts constitute art or not.

Monet was derided in his time for rejecting the old masters, Impressionism was once controversial.

Mr. McNaughton belongs in the company of neither of these two and certainly not Michaelangelo.

If he wants to support our President and the movement that propelled him to office he needs to understand that the quality of his work is important as far as persuasion. As it stands, strip away the message that has so many FReepers enthralled and what do you have? A murky, muddy painting with bad proportion and comical perspective of rather childishly rendered human figures. It wouldn’t place at a county fair competition among junior high art students.


13 posted on 12/26/2017 9:39:46 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson