• LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I didn’t cherry pick, I attacked your premise with examples that break it.

    Those are fine too, but my point was artists who create technical pieces of things that are beautiful, that beautiful pieces indeed are still appreciated today and I wouldn’t call the previously listed artist’s works any of what you described previously.

    The entire Catholic mass was told in Latin at that time specifically to reduce accessibility and increase reverence. I think you underestimate Catholic cuntiness. They were putting people in their place with all of that. If you don’t understand how Catholicism was used by Rome and then later the world to keep slaves in line and convince poor people to fight wars, then you are missing a lot of info on the world. Most Abrahamic religions are meant for that, that’s what the legend of Abraham is about.

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      My premise wasn’t that “all art today is about elitism”, it was about the art world. One of Banksy’s works actually went up in value after it was shredded!

      Who gives a shit about “Catholic cuntiness”? I was talking about Michelangelo whose patron was the pope but who had no love for the pope himself (and may not have liked the church either). Michelangelo the artist made his work for billions to love and enjoy for all time. Banksy’s shredded painting is funny as a middle finger to the rich guy who bought it but it backfired when the painting went up in value after that.

      • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        The art world decided to turn its nose up at this kind of popular art and pivot toward controversial, shocking, and lazy (looking) art intended to provoke all kinds of responses (many negative). This continues to drive a perception in the public of an artist community that is increasingly elitist and out of touch.

        People forget that it wasn’t always this way.

        Banksy has cute and beautiful art too. The balloons, astronauts, and kid ones.

        The painting’s location and grandiosity prove my point. It is still a beautiful piece but it wasn’t painted to be accessible to the common man or to be a feel good piece - it was meant to inspire awe and divine worship. Michaelangelo commonly made pieces like this, including ofc David, a LARGE and detailed piece, which is why he was sought after by the wealthy. He was not an accessible every day common man artist like Banksy lol.

        You’re just saying stuff to say stuff. Like when people freak out about vegans when they don’t know anything about it, it’s just what they’ve been told.

        • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Far more people have seen Michelangelo’s art in person than have Banksy’s and this will always be the case. Michelangelo’s art will remain relevant a hundred thousand years from now, whereas Banksy’s is tied to current events. It’s not even close!

          • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Okay, but that wasn’t your original assertion. Also, there’s no way to prove this claim anyway about relevancy. Like God is pretty irrelevant these days, why would a painting of him really matter today? Why does David matter? They are just made up stories.

            Again, you’re just saying stuff to say stuff