Why is Modern Art so Bad? | PragerU

Reacting to a video by @PragerU on why Modern art is so bad.

[davidjordan]

Good video. But I'll add something. Most of the late 19th century artists who were seminal in the creation of modern art were in fact great artists themselves. And they embodied most of the "methods of the masters" that the video mentions. The problem is that they opened the door for much-less-skilled artists who followed them. In any event, in the end it isn't the artists themselves who destroyed art. It was the thought leaders and wealthy patrons who were primarily responsible, as they are always the ones who decide what will end up in the galleries and museums, and sell. Note as well that the general public never followed the thought leaders on this, which led to a further ungrounding of the art world.

[michelclarijs]

Great vid, Nic! I have the same problems with music too. I am a composer and guitarplayer and love songs or storytelling from the heart. The problem is people are to be told what's good for them... is this art or not? It is a serous problem for future generations... when some media-clown says that music is outdated .Good music or great artwork in general should be TIMELESS.

[mustang]

My personal opinion is that much in the same way as a finely designed car, boat, or even something like a samurai sword is a masterpiece; Or, a bottle of fine wine is greatly owed to the vintner and an exquisite meal owed to the Chef. A work of Art very much in the same way, in order for it to be considered, a "masterpiece" requires what those other things do and that is a unique talent alongside a skill that has been honed through diligence and inspired passion. Among other things. How could we consider some of these modern artists as masters of their craft when they really haven't in any way exhibited talent or skillfulness? Some modern art definitely does do this but generally when you go into a modern art museum there is far too many "artworks" that are nothing more than, say, a doll that someone removed the wig from or a piece of human feces in front of some street sign, or a few words on a canvas. What talent is required to make such a thing? Why on earth are we as humans celebrating something so underwhelming and downright hideous in so many instances? Even some of the artworks that are just splatters on Canvas as well, if it can be faked with relative ease, then it truly is nothing to celebrate. Don't get me wrong, some of it is fascinating and wonderful, some of it requires talent. But, will we honestly still remember many of these aforementioned artists several generations from now? It almost feels like humanity as a whole is being duped by accepting this as art and not laughing this sort of a thing out of the art galleries.

[vebdaklu]

Of course, the starting premise is this - PragerU is an ultraconservative evangelical channel, and their main goal is to convince people that ANYTHING that is "modern" is garbage, and they do the same with anything foreign. Just based on that you can see the flaws - they took pieces of art from a period spanning centuries, completely ignored any other art from the same time, and just compared to something convenient from a modern period. It's pretty thin and see-through, as far as arguments go. It's like saying a boxer is always weaker than someone who does karate by having just a couple of top guys in Karate beat a couple of boxers.

[duncanweller]

Thanks for the video. The problem I have, as is the case here in Canada, is the lack of support for the popular arts and for artists who really do have talent. We talented and popular/classical artists (High Art and Low Art artists, as opposed to Fine Art artists) are being crowded out by completely talentless people (many are total con-artists) who are unfairly getting government support and support by public and private galleries. Much of contemporary art is intellectual signalling, and doesn't perform any of the functions that art has performed for thousands of years by all cultures the world over. Contemporary art functions are often total inversions of the historical arts. And much of the the history of contemporary art is false. The majority of contemporary art techniques were originally invented by non-western countries and by comic book artists in Europe, and others, including children. Modernism has an alternate history that very few professors of art will teach. Read The Cultural Cold War: The CIA and the World of Arts and Letters, by Francis Stoner Saunders. And if you've ever met (or been friends with) hard core contemporary artists there is often a hatred and nihilism in their hearts that is palpable. Usually it's caused by envy of the talented, and sadly, something they learn from an ideologically bent understanding of art taught at many universities.

[willjapheth]

Why do they feel like comparing old realism works to contemporary provocative works is a fair comparison? They should compare historical provocative works to modern ones and compare current realism to historical realism.

And do people really care what rich people waste their money on? If they want weird art then so be. I don't have to visit their museums or private collections.

[TheWillischillis]

Under what i know ART is, MODERN art causes FEELING. Yes, the esthetic is missing and form, however they (modern day artist) make you FEEL something. I understand the history of ART and every culture have a beginning, middle and END periods. We see this in the Italian (ROMAN). GREEK and Egyptian periods of Art. We currently are living in ONE OF THOSE periods where, everyone and anyone has or can create Art. Art is not (at the beginning center around a religion) that is bureaucratic and GROWS with the society! Christianity is the beginning of (earlier 1st and 2nd century) part of this period. We are in the end periods of our culture (Easter Bunny) and Elvis Presley! So, he is missing it on a LARGE scale!! Let the current day Artist make you feel discuss in their work and subject matter!! Its okay its working!! This ART is making you FEEL We are in the end period of our culture. No, there is no new religion surrounding our culture with its purity and purpose (in the begging they create Art around a religion and do not leave their name etc.) " Yes Why is Modern Art so Bad? Because we are living in the END period of our culture !! Enjoy the ride!! Yes, its a little dirty, and nasty, filthy but this symbolizes our society and culture !!

[amazingspiderfatty]

I am an avid reader of Kant and I can say that Kant wanted human beings to make art that reflects the beauty of nature and the human condition and to do art for the love and sake of art itself. Kant would not see a toilet seat that has been transformed into a fountain as good art. A good example that backs up my claim about Kant's interpretation of art comes from his deep love for poetry. Kant sees poetry as the highest art form because it can break or bend the laws of language but in a charming way. An inverted toilet made into a fountain does not make it charming or good art. It is still art but just not good art in the eyes of Kant.

[juliosantiagom]

Great video as usual!!!
thank you Nic.

[jean-pierredevent]

Perhaps modern art is indeed the art of our time representing the shallowness, the absence of real meaning but instead the kick of the day, the hunger for always a new dopamine shot...

[Bungy-jo]

Literally had someone posting a bunch of conspiracy videos and cramming opinions and calling everyones art in the server satanic, he posted this very video in the server.

Thanks Nic.

[Nerdpainter]

I’m so sick of it. Some of the worst things I’ve seen it galleries in museums are: a room full of bags of trash, a pile of carpets, a pot with a hole in it, a trashcan, an entire wall of white canvases. I could go on.

[Jack-sipg]

Actually, the downgrade of quality in lieu of fast food is something we see everywhere.

Tv shows and movies used to be so beautifully filmed. Art in many cases. Not of modern productions I've seen for years now. Youtube is fast food as well.

Acting quality has diminished so much compared to the shows I watched from the 70s - 90s.

Animation quality has really gone down hill on cartoon too. Hand drawn looked more organic, computer shaded looks hideously sharp.

Everyone thinks they're worthy to be an influencer these days lol.

I personally think lots of people are out to fit the image of "an artist." The lifestyle. They live out the expectations they have in mind that were imprinted in them by media.

[fuzzwald]

Everyone is an art critic. But in the end, art is a reflection of the culture that spawned it. The idea that art should be universally understood is lazy and pretentious. Art can be many things, , and it's not the job of the artist to just make whatever the dillantes like.This video is thinly disguised apologetics for Dennis Prager.

[arcailecorp]

Modern art your kids can do it why buy them anyway you can create it yourself and tell everyone its modern art ehe

[murph_mustela]

On the topic of beauty, old mate's terribly good-looking but his hair is letting him down. I mean I get it, my hair gets like that too when I'm painting. But he could look like Achilles if he'd brush it and trim the beard. This channel is super helpful for me and I'm going to subscribe. I aspire to paint like you do with the money and materials I have.

[mikechamberlain]

Hunters Bidens blow tube watercolors sell for 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[cellarroom]

I think these type of videos always display a lack of knowledge of modern art. I'm foremost a musician, but I paint as well. I disagree with the idea of art as needing to be beautiful, or to have an objective beauty. If we were to compare painting with music, and the arguments put forth in this video all good music would sound like Debussy, Bach or Beethoven. There's nothing wrong with classical music, and I agree that classical music has a level of craftsmanship you don't see in any other kind of music. But you also have jazz, rock, rap, metal and so many other types of music. Some music is simple, some are meant to convey an emotion of anger, of brutality (like punk), some (like jazz) build on collective creation. My point is to see classical esthetic values as the highest form of art is extremely narrow minded in my opinion. Sure, some modern art will suck, but so did some classical art as well, we just don't see it now. Something with modern art. The modern art that will survive is the one that transcends the current ideals and trends. Yet that doesn't mean everything else is garbage.

[XandraMeltphace]

There isn’t some boundary to what is and what isn’t art.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, you can get mad at people liking a rock more than your art you’ve slaved over for hours but you can’t take that away from them. And, saying it’s bad because it took less work than you or it doesn’t “improve your life”is just your perspective, it’s not objective truth. You just seem bitter because these people making millions don’t fit your antiquated view of what an artist is.

[markhamilton]

I dunno feels like you're being a bit rigid. Of course PragerU is going to find the worst examples of modern art and certain movements are less meaningful to people than others. But I doubt you'd consider Van Gough, Caillebotte, or Monet to be bad. How about Edward Hopper or Andrew Wyeth? Even less accessible artists like Rothko or Jackson Pollock made great works. As my college art history prof would say to students who claimed they could've made a particular work, "well, you didn't." Conservatives likes to trot out Duchamp or Mapplethorpe whenever they disparage modern art, but at a certain point it feels like nut-picking when there's so much truly great modern art.