Sacked...
Full Member
Posts • 7,978
Likes • 1,338
October 2007
|
WHY STREET ART IS NO LONGER THE ARTWORLD’S BASTARD., by Sacked... on Jul 5, 2015 12:18:41 GMT 1, The academic art sphere has an obsession with two terminologies: lowbrow and highbrow. Each one of these has a subtype that adjusts to a specific medium or form: galleries and public spaces, haute couture and streetwear, sculpture and pottery and stretched canvas vs. an abandoned building. The high brow is idolized and the arts belonging to the low brow are frowned upon. But what makes high art and low art so overwhelmingly different that a war must endure? Especially if these two opposites are no longer distant.
www.allcitycanvas.com/why-street-art-is-no-longer-the-artworlds-bastard/
The academic art sphere has an obsession with two terminologies: lowbrow and highbrow. Each one of these has a subtype that adjusts to a specific medium or form: galleries and public spaces, haute couture and streetwear, sculpture and pottery and stretched canvas vs. an abandoned building. The high brow is idolized and the arts belonging to the low brow are frowned upon. But what makes high art and low art so overwhelmingly different that a war must endure? Especially if these two opposites are no longer distant. www.allcitycanvas.com/why-street-art-is-no-longer-the-artworlds-bastard/ |
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,688
Likes • 6,320
June 2009
|
WHY STREET ART IS NO LONGER THE ARTWORLD’S BASTARD., by met on Jul 6, 2015 22:51:23 GMT 1, The academic art sphere has an obsession with two terminologies: lowbrow and highbrow. Each one of these has a subtype that adjusts to a specific medium or form: galleries and public spaces, haute couture and streetwear, sculpture and pottery and stretched canvas vs. an abandoned building. The high brow is idolized and the arts belonging to the low brow are frowned upon. But what makes high art and low art so overwhelmingly different that a war must endure? Especially if these two opposites are no longer distant. www.allcitycanvas.com/why-street-art-is-no-longer-the-artworlds-bastard/
Writing a credible article is difficult when your opening statement — i.e. the very premise and foundation upon which your arguments are constructed — happens to be bollocks.
Unwarranted assumption fallacy.
The academic art sphere has an obsession with two terminologies: lowbrow and highbrow. Each one of these has a subtype that adjusts to a specific medium or form: galleries and public spaces, haute couture and streetwear, sculpture and pottery and stretched canvas vs. an abandoned building. The high brow is idolized and the arts belonging to the low brow are frowned upon. But what makes high art and low art so overwhelmingly different that a war must endure? Especially if these two opposites are no longer distant. www.allcitycanvas.com/why-street-art-is-no-longer-the-artworlds-bastard/Writing a credible article is difficult when your opening statement — i.e. the very premise and foundation upon which your arguments are constructed — happens to be bollocks. Unwarranted assumption fallacy. |
|
|
|
WHY STREET ART IS NO LONGER THE ARTWORLD’S BASTARD., by Peter Bengtsen on Jul 8, 2015 9:51:18 GMT 1, The academic art sphere has an obsession with two terminologies: lowbrow and highbrow. Each one of these has a subtype that adjusts to a specific medium or form: galleries and public spaces, haute couture and streetwear, sculpture and pottery and stretched canvas vs. an abandoned building. The high brow is idolized and the arts belonging to the low brow are frowned upon. But what makes high art and low art so overwhelmingly different that a war must endure? Especially if these two opposites are no longer distant. www.allcitycanvas.com/why-street-art-is-no-longer-the-artworlds-bastard/Writing a credible article is difficult when your opening statement — i.e. the very premise and foundation upon which your arguments are constructed — happens to be bollocks. Unwarranted assumption fallacy.
I was going to make a similar comment when the link was first posted.
When reading through the article, I initially thought the author was discussing the wider "academic art sphere", including the field of art history and visual studies to which I in part belong. As I got further into the article, I realised that the "academic art sphere" here refers to those who teach and practice art within the context of the art academies. I have no personal experience working in that context, but it comes across to me as if the author is taking a real and personal, but also isolated, experience and elevating it to a universal schism.
While I would assume there is an interest within the "academic art sphere" to maintain its relevance, and while this may lead some to question the artistic practices that take place outside the sphere, I don't believe this constitutes an "obsession" - and certainly not an obsession with terminologies.
The academic art sphere has an obsession with two terminologies: lowbrow and highbrow. Each one of these has a subtype that adjusts to a specific medium or form: galleries and public spaces, haute couture and streetwear, sculpture and pottery and stretched canvas vs. an abandoned building. The high brow is idolized and the arts belonging to the low brow are frowned upon. But what makes high art and low art so overwhelmingly different that a war must endure? Especially if these two opposites are no longer distant. www.allcitycanvas.com/why-street-art-is-no-longer-the-artworlds-bastard/Writing a credible article is difficult when your opening statement — i.e. the very premise and foundation upon which your arguments are constructed — happens to be bollocks. Unwarranted assumption fallacy. I was going to make a similar comment when the link was first posted. When reading through the article, I initially thought the author was discussing the wider "academic art sphere", including the field of art history and visual studies to which I in part belong. As I got further into the article, I realised that the "academic art sphere" here refers to those who teach and practice art within the context of the art academies. I have no personal experience working in that context, but it comes across to me as if the author is taking a real and personal, but also isolated, experience and elevating it to a universal schism. While I would assume there is an interest within the "academic art sphere" to maintain its relevance, and while this may lead some to question the artistic practices that take place outside the sphere, I don't believe this constitutes an "obsession" - and certainly not an obsession with terminologies. |
|
Deleted
Posts • 0
Likes •
January 1970
|
WHY STREET ART IS NO LONGER THE ARTWORLD’S BASTARD., by Deleted on Jul 8, 2015 10:10:45 GMT 1, Writing a credible article is difficult when your opening statement — i.e. the very premise and foundation upon which your arguments are constructed — happens to be bollocks. Unwarranted assumption fallacy. I was going to make a similar comment when the link was first posted. When reading through the article, I initially thought the author was discussing the wider "academic art sphere", including the field of art history and visual studies to which I in part belong. As I got further into the article, I realised that the "academic art sphere" here refers to those who teach and practice art within the context of the art academies. I have no personal experience working in that context, but it comes across to me as if the author is taking a real and personal, but also isolated, experience and elevating it to a universal schism. While I would assume there is an interest within the "academic art sphere" to maintain its relevance, and while this may lead some to question the artistic practices that take place outside the sphere, I don't believe this constitutes an "obsession" - and certainly not an obsession with terminologies.
Writing a credible article is difficult when your opening statement — i.e. the very premise and foundation upon which your arguments are constructed — happens to be bollocks. Unwarranted assumption fallacy. I was going to make a similar comment when the link was first posted. When reading through the article, I initially thought the author was discussing the wider "academic art sphere", including the field of art history and visual studies to which I in part belong. As I got further into the article, I realised that the "academic art sphere" here refers to those who teach and practice art within the context of the art academies. I have no personal experience working in that context, but it comes across to me as if the author is taking a real and personal, but also isolated, experience and elevating it to a universal schism. While I would assume there is an interest within the "academic art sphere" to maintain its relevance, and while this may lead some to question the artistic practices that take place outside the sphere, I don't believe this constitutes an "obsession" - and certainly not an obsession with terminologies. It sounds very much like an art student making stencils for his graduate show and getting short shrift from his tutors. A valid gripe, but certainly not universal. |
|
