@Background Pony #167A
Yes. Yes, you’re right. So, where we do put this: Anstraction, Naïf, Trash-Art, Antiart, Bizarro… Or simply a piece of [ugly word] XD? It’s great to have a serious conversation about art now and then.
@bigladiesman
No art historian files any of those artists but Duchamp under Dada. Dada is more of a thematic approach rather than visual, but neither the theme nor visuals in this line up with Dada whatsoever.
It’s a very personal point of view, but Duchamp and some of his alumni, like Bacon, tended to this kind of weird, unsettling, grotesque and minimalistic approach to art. That’s why I personally put abstract artists like Rothko or Pollock in a kind of relationship with Dada.
I like it.
I’ve always been fond of the term “digital folk art”.
Yes. Yes, you’re right. So, where we do put this: Anstraction, Naïf, Trash-Art, Antiart, Bizarro… Or simply a piece of [ugly word] XD? It’s great to have a serious conversation about art now and then.
No art historian files any of those artists but Duchamp under Dada. Dada is more of a thematic approach rather than visual, but neither the theme nor visuals in this line up with Dada whatsoever.
I mean, Rothko was eerie in his own way, almost as eerie as Ensor, vecause he left all to the imagination of the viewer.
It’s a very personal point of view, but Duchamp and some of his alumni, like Bacon, tended to this kind of weird, unsettling, grotesque and minimalistic approach to art. That’s why I personally put abstract artists like Rothko or Pollock in a kind of relationship with Dada.
Exactly in what way is this even remotely like the Dada movement?