RAE BK 🇺🇸 Brooklyn New York Street Artist, by darhart on Jun 4, 2013 16:32:02 GMT 1,

Jun 4, 2013 14:17:50 GMT 1 stvro22 said:

100% agree with Tinmar. Seems like you have some axe to grind with RAE by trying to write off his work as having no new technique. Really lame debate mate. Doubt it if you've actually looked at his whole body of work either. There are many pieces that do have "messages" (not that I always need one) but others that are more playful and use recycled objects. Hey maybe he's talking about the environment! But according to you it would still have no merit because he didn't invent a "technique".

I'm always up for a good debate when there is one to be had but you're presenting a pretty weak one at the moment.

Please try and read and understand my posts before comenting, you say you're "up for a good debate" but to do this you need to take in what has first been said. I'll try and make it simple for you.

I've at no point said he or any artist has to invent a new technique.

What i gave was a list of things that I look for in a piece of art that i think would give it merit.

Inventing a new technique is an example. It doesn't have to have a new technique, it's just one thing that could be enough to make a painting interesting.

Following so far?

On that same line i also suggested that having a skilled technique could be enough to make a painting interesting. It could be an old technique that many artists over the years have used, nothing new at all but has been used with a degree of skill showing artistic quality to lift it above the norm. But even then it need have no new technique, or skillfull technique, read on!

On that same line i gave other examples of technique that i think would make the painting have merit. I separtated these sugggestion with a slash "\"  meaning any one of them is valid. 

Still with me?

But, even if the painting has none of the above, no great technique of any note at all that still doesnt mean its a meritless painting! Yes thats right, i then went on to point out a whole host of other merit worthy things ANY ONE OF WHICH would be enough to give it merit.

Phew this is hard work, i've explained those few lines and thats enough for me, but you get the idea dont you?

Jun 4, 2013 14:17:50 GMT 1 stvro22 said:

100% agree with Tinmar. Seems like you have some axe to grind with RAE by trying to write off his work as having no new technique. Really lame debate mate. Doubt it if you've actually looked at his whole body of work either. There are many pieces that do have "messages" (not that I always need one) but others that are more playful and use recycled objects. Hey maybe he's talking about the environment! But according to you it would still have no merit because he didn't invent a "technique".

I'm always up for a good debate when there is one to be had but you're presenting a pretty weak one at the moment.

Please try and read and understand my posts before comenting, you say you're "up for a good debate" but to do this you need to take in what has first been said. I'll try and make it simple for you.

I've at no point said he or any artist has to invent a new technique.

What i gave was a list of things that I look for in a piece of art that i think would give it merit.

Inventing a new technique is an example. It doesn't have to have a new technique, it's just one thing that could be enough to make a painting interesting.

Following so far?

On that same line i also suggested that having a skilled technique could be enough to make a painting interesting. It could be an old technique that many artists over the years have used, nothing new at all but has been used with a degree of skill showing artistic quality to lift it above the norm. But even then it need have no new technique, or skillfull technique, read on!

On that same line i gave other examples of technique that i think would make the painting have merit. I separtated these sugggestion with a slash "\"  meaning any one of them is valid. 

Still with me?

But, even if the painting has none of the above, no great technique of any note at all that still doesnt mean its a meritless painting! Yes thats right, i then went on to point out a whole host of other merit worthy things ANY ONE OF WHICH would be enough to give it merit.

Phew this is hard work, i've explained those few lines and thats enough for me, but you get the idea dont you?