This deviant's full pageview
graph is unavailable.
Member
I am a General Addict
billybobskin
17/Male/United Kingdom
Why I Am Here
No reason given yet
Last Visit: 5 days ago
billybobskin (Alias)
Art Zone
Personal Zone
Misc. Zone
This is the place where you can personalize your profile!
But, how?
By moving, adding and personalizing widgets.
You can drag and drop to rearrange.
You can edit widgets to customize them.
The left side has widgets you can add!
Some widgets you can only access when you get a premium membership.
Some widgets have options that are only available when you get a premium membership.
We've split the page into zones!
Certain widgets can only be added to certain zones.
"Why," you ask? Because we want profile pages to have freedom of customization, but also to have some consistency. This way, when anyone visits a deviant, they know they can always find the art in the top left, and personal info in the top right.
Don't forget, restraints can bring out the creativity in you!
Now go forth and astound us all with your devious profiles!
I don't understand what people are complaining about; ANYTHING can be art. If Duchamp can sign a urinal, tilt it on its side and call it art, you can post pictures of your creepy belly.
Duchamp was a genius. anybody trying to do the same is a jerk. he put art alive but at same time killed it. hence this kind of "anything is art do what you want etc..." which makes art just useless and uninteresting, just like posting picture of what is called a fetichism and without any artistic purposes. think about it
--
"baths are disgusting. sitting there in a tepid pool of your own filth. all kinds of microscopic parasites and organisms having sex all around you." someone
So using that logic, was Pollock also a copy-cat? And all the others after him, for "breaking the mold?" There's not a whole lot of "new" things you can do in art without being really far out there. I think the main reason this is getting a lot of criticism is because the photos are not very artistically well-done. If they were, I'm sure there would be a different response.
Just look at some of the photographers on here, taking pictures of butterflies and flowers. It's all been done before; this is new. How can you say it's "useless and uninteresting?"
but it is ! nobody's blaming them because nobody care ! but for this example - a boy that takes picture of his distorted belly - it makes people react because of the shocking value of the subject (just as some that post only pics of their penis) while he probably doesn't even know why he's posting it.
i'm sorry i don't understand the comparison with Pollock as he has nothing to do with Duchamp ?
I fully agree with criticism of the lack of "well-doneness" of the pictures. Yet I would not encourage him to try to make 'good pictures' but pictures that clearly state his own will.
I was reacting about the 'anything can be art' which both true and untrue. Art is a matter of freedom but also of thought. It's not as fun as it look - art should make artist suffer in pre-conception. "Why do i do this ?" "How can I transmit what I have to say ?" For me an piece of art, whatever it is, is interesting when it HAS to exist. it's not about doing what you want and all this "if you don't like just don't look" bullshit that let the world be overrun by mediocrity and self-praise.
--
"baths are disgusting. sitting there in a tepid pool of your own filth. all kinds of microscopic parasites and organisms having sex all around you." someone
soy feeder
--
Nakoo.The.Tauren.
--
What happens in Vegas, stays in KITT.
--
"baths are disgusting. sitting there in a tepid pool
of your own filth. all kinds of microscopic parasites
and organisms having sex all around you." someone
Just look at some of the photographers on here, taking pictures of butterflies and flowers. It's all been done before; this is new. How can you say it's "useless and uninteresting?"
--
What happens in Vegas, stays in KITT.
i'm sorry i don't understand the comparison with Pollock as he has nothing to do with Duchamp ?
I fully agree with criticism of the lack of "well-doneness" of the pictures. Yet I would not encourage him to try to make 'good pictures' but pictures that clearly state his own will.
I was reacting about the 'anything can be art' which both true and untrue. Art is a matter of freedom but also of thought. It's not as fun as it look - art should make artist suffer in pre-conception. "Why do i do this ?" "How can I transmit what I have to say ?" For me an piece of art, whatever it is, is interesting when it HAS to exist. it's not about doing what you want and all this "if you don't like just don't look" bullshit that let the world be overrun by mediocrity and self-praise.
--
"baths are disgusting. sitting there in a tepid pool
of your own filth. all kinds of microscopic parasites
and organisms having sex all around you." someone
--
your best quality is your worst quality
unless you're a pedophile
Previous Page12Next Page