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

maybe for some people worse is better , but not for me , i just see it as a big art cliche of having the point being "to be pointless" or something like that , i'm not really gonna waste my time pondering what a black square means cause that's probably all its there for , to start discussions over its "meaning"

 

cow eating grass and black squares are one hit wonders. my favorite of them all is the red agitator, which for those who havent seen it, was an agitator out of a washing machine painted red and hung on the wall. nicely fraimed and all that. i forget who fraimed the poor thing, but i thought it was cute anyway.

of course none of this things bear repeating. i think that in itself, being the first to do what will be an instant cleche the next time anyone repeats it, well it doesn't make anyone an art god, but i think its valid and ok. then again i might not look at it twice either. although i might just hang my own red agitator on my own wall sometime, because i believe anyone and everyone IS an artist.

i wouldn't pay millions for the first one at a southaby's auction however. collecting is a con game, creating is a life. and artistic creatition belongs on PUBLIC display.

=^^=
.../\...

 

I cant understand why there 'hits' in the first place, as someone who makes I living as a full time artist it pisses me off to think that 'black squares 'may have sold for thousands, I could do with out the politics of the art world if all art was public display the critics probably would not have much to say either

 

He's broken down the complexities of art to its basic elements - colour, contrast and form. In many ways, it's a conceptual work; makes you question at what point does it cease to be art?
At this time, painting that would not be considered especially radical because it's already been done almost a century ago. There are all kinds of cliches in art that really seem pointless now. But in that context, around the art movements going on at the time, it was in no way gimmicky.
Say what you will, but you're the kind of people these artists are trying to rebel against--people who insist "this isnt art."
That said, it's really not my favourite piece. I'm into minimalism, but I much prefer minimalists like Mondrian whose work was a lot more interesting, since it played more with balance and form. But regardless, somebody has to defend it.

 

I didnt say It wasnt art but its more of a cop-out

 

I think its douchey and extremely uninventive. Its art, yes, in my opinion. But its not creative art. How many people have done the white canvas or black canvas thing? Plenty, enough, ask anyone you know if they've seen a white canvas at an exhibit. I don't think there's anything to a black canvas. BUT at least that one has a border so its more pleasing to look at I suppose. Thats better than just a few gessoed canvases in an exhibit.

 

ok, the line is drawn where, if a child blindfolded can draw it, its not art. Hence, this black square is not art. A samurai warrior holding a bloody head, thats pretty hard for a blindfolded child, so, it is art.

 

how well drawn, is said samurai and how much time and effort did the the blind folded child take? was it nicely rendered?

 

I personally think anything someone creates is art... so pretty much everything is art. But there are levels of creativity ya know? And creativity and talent is what really counts.

 

well said

 

Yeah, art is nature's key ingridient. Theres just a level of crativity that goes along with it. But meddle, I don't know any child who could make an actual depiction of a samurai. That being said, I do know a child if blindfolded could make a black box.

 

not to come off sounding narrow minded but are children now the measuring sick for creativity? Im just saying that more should be considered when judging art,and somewhere along the line ,the art world forgot about balance, in regard to all the elements that can go into a painting . Art movements have been the engine for the progression of art for a long time ,but one negative aspect they always have had was (your wrong and Im rite) and when one art movement rebels against the one prior they don't stop to consider all element ,there just to busy reinventing the wheel...or so it seems
and thats how crap gets accepted and sold for big $$$

 

children ARE a better "measuring stick" of creativity, then little green pieces of paper ever have been or ever will be.

=^^=
.../\...

 

That's easy to say but this came before those uninventive pieces you're talking about. It was painted in 1913. How many people have done it? Lots. How many people did it previous to this one? Very few. What's boring and uninventive now was cutting-edge and interesting almost a century ago. You can't judge a piece of art (of any kind) without putting it in historical context.