What do you think of Malevich's "Black Square"?

I think its artistic value is overshadowed by its pointlessness. But hey, that's just one guy's opinion.

 

link! link!

 

Uhh....it's a black square. But sure, here it is:




It must be at least somewhat well-known, since the first time I saw it was in a college textbook.

 

Wow, that is pretty pointless, I mean, you can buy pieces of black paper and I'm sure even a retard could use a pair of scissors to cut that piece into a square and say "TA DA! Check out my square!"

"YOur square sucks"

That it does, art? Thumbs down, way down. BUrn it, it doesn't have a right to exsist.

 

welcome to the world of art.
full of bullshitting.

 

Well if you think it's pointless (and I think I agree), then the question is where do you draw the line?

What about abstract art where there is a complete lack of any form, just seemingly random splashes of paint? I know people have paid millions for that kind of stuff and you can't knock it without having SOMEONE say "you just don't get it".


But anyway with the black square, I CAN see the statement that it makes.

 

Which is...?

 

i wouldnt say that i think this is pointless. No art is pointless. Maybe there is a fine line, or maybe that there is no line and that what makes art, art.

i remember someone replying to a thread i made awhile back "art is art"

 

pFFF, you just don't get it.

 

i think exactly what it is. its a black square. period.

maybe it can be made into something that means something.... or maybe it is just made famous because you are supposed to think about what they want you to think. i dont know.
i do know i dont think somebody should pay money for the piece of art-work, it is simply a black square, and what it probably represents can be duplicated quite easily.

 

No, I don't. Can you explain it to me?

 

Pretentious BS if you ask me.

 

Well, it's useless if considered art...in an artistic way. Modern minimalist art takes less skill than it does thought, but this particular one is just ehhh. It really does push the line of simplicity, but that's probably exactly the point it was intended to make.
I'm more for beautiful drawings or paintings, which show more of an investment of the artist's soul than art made solely out of statement, without any "looking value".

I do appreciate that it asks for thought, though.

 

Maybe the artist is just trying to piss people off, or get some pompous dicks to try and find some form of meaning to it and humiliate them in the process? I guess the fact that we're discussing it right now implies that it does evoke some thought in the viewer.

 

"get some pompous dicks to try and find some form of meaning to it and humiliate them in the process?"

I think this could nail it, if the artist didn't do much minimalist art other than this; just to mock people who make complex meanings from things that mean jack shit.

Hell, fine, this is art haha.

 

i dont know much about art...i guess he just painted it because he was trying to express something he felt at the time.

maybe we just over think art sometimes.

 

Eh...I can understand where you're coming from, but to create something that any halfwit could and pass it off as some deep form of art is a little...I dont know...classless...low.

 

I guess anything could be art to someone.A picture of this page,if framed,would start the bs art machine .For somebody.If I had money to invest in art,this would not even qualify.For me.

 

why are people willing to accept crap ,in the name of 'being innovative' there is a small amount of minimalist art that's worth anything, ironic ,in my eyes 96% is cheep gimmick's it will never stand the test of time.I wish history could work faster

 

remember Andy Warhol and his soup cans.that was a crock,but brought him plenty of fame and $.