I always look at things and try to see something different. What is the angle or intent of the creation, is there something hidden? Is the general accepted understanding acurate or is there an underlying message meant to be seen when you look at the creation through the eyes of the artist.
So we see here looking into a crystal ball. But is it? Is it something more?
From another perspective I see not a crystal ball, but I see a void. A void expansion emanating from within as the artist tries to contain it. I notice the eyes are not looking at the “crystal ball” but at the viewer. I notice some of the shading on the hand also suggesting that the “ball” is not actually producing light but consuming it. If this were a negative of a photo the orginal image would show the “ball” as empty blackness. So as I look at this I see the Negative of an orginal photo where the artist is staring ominously as warning that the void is expanding. That in a deep layered paradox, a negative shows the darkness as light. This is what I see, but here’s to be being crazy!
-M
wow, your interpretation is very interesting! Of course this study was made in context of this narritive -->
"...every 50 to 100 years, the being that is the “greatest artist”, is reincarnated and hosted by the body of the most important artist of that century.
every century the Greatest Artist possesses and displays immeasurable excellence that reflects and supports the social and political condition of our world."
I imagine that the narrator is in conversation with the present aka the viewer. The narrator implies that there is no "greatest artist" in the present moment. At the end of the video, a slideshow repeats of the last 5 greatest artists of the past century leading up until present day. Marcel Duchamp (01), Pablo Picasso(02), Salvador Dali(03), Andy Warhol(04), Jeff Koons(05) and then "?".
"?" is whoever is willing to fulfill the role that is the "most important artist of the 21st century" and/or the greatest artist(06) .
I'm very interested in your interpretation of the crystal ball being a void. Especially in relation to the next greatest artist's current identity being a literal question mark "?". I also love how you noticed that Warhol is making eye contact with the viewer rather than looking into the crystal ball. You have a great eye lol
I would love to know more about your perception of the Warhol study in relation to the Anonymous narrative if you care to share more. I will for sure be opening up this narrative as time goes on, I'm learning more about the work and myself as the creator as time goes on.
I welcome an interesting conversation. Although I’m not sure your question. The Warhol study is something the narrative of the video as one of 5 great artist as I understand. Are you asking if I think Warhol is one of the 5 greatest of the century? I’d say I know less of the narrative from the video and more of the sketch. It’s easier to surmise an assessment of intent from a sketch then it is from the fluid nature of a speech. I thenk generally there is a discussion the creator of video is searching for. Art is dying as form of entertainment. A discussion about art is a good place to start.
@coldicehotwater I was asking your thoughts, on the “void” you recognized in the warhol study in comparison to the use of the question mark at the end of the video. I do like what you said about discussion. Would you say the video would be more open to assessment and easier to follow if it had subtitles? Also if you don’t mind me asking, why do you think art is dying as a form of entertainment?
Unless the video and or the sentiment is coming from warhol, I’m not sure I see a connection. If the view point is from the videos creator to warhols, then my thoughts would just be conjecture.
I would have to understand more of the video creators intent to help with guidance. Although I can say, by using, for lack of better terms, “anonymous themed cinematography, it’s distracting. It is a premise, indeed which definitely serves a purpose as a platform to deliver a message but I don’t say it helps particularly well in this instance. Subtitles are useful but if the speech is delivered properly, it isn’t entirely needed.
The world is descending into chaos. Art, although it may be produced in war is often of the first things to. Art is often slow and complex, requiring thoughts and introspection. There is less and less time for that. Even as a side effect of war, that being death and destruction, art is lost. One can easily look at left over ruins or long lost paintings like Van Goghs “painter on his way to work” or courbets “the stone breakers” and see war destroys not only life, but the very fabric of existence. I suppose a better statement than “art is dying as a form of entertainment” is....
“The arts of the world are the canary in the coal mine of life it self. For as art dies, surely humans will follow.”
Interesting! Well it's not coming from Warhol specifically but it is coming from art, the collective or general voice of art history past. Which through participation Warhol is prominently apart of as well as his predecessors . So that's where I make the connection. Warhol being one of the 5 significant "greatest artists" of art history past [that I'm focusing on in this work] in conversation with art history present about art history future. The idea for this study was conceived from his quote "in the future everyone will be famous for fifteen minutes", which shows that Warhol is capable of "seeing the future" or at least interested in defining it lol I do agree that the viewpoint is conjecture but isn't that what the future is? lol
I've been having trouble with deciding on a visual identity of the narrator and the Anonymous Guy Fawkes avatar was an easy go to because it is of course anonymous lol I do agree that it is a bit distracting and a little far off from the subject matter but I don't know if that is good or bad yet. But your point is definitely noted!
I agree with you about art dying as a form of entertainment but I think for different reasons(if I'm understanding what you said correctly) Art can for sure exist in chaos and can be spawned from it. You have works and practices from artists like Chris Burden, Francisco De Goya, Damien Hirst, Paul Mccarthy and even Picasso's Guernica that have lent from and to a chaotic world.
"Art, freedom and creativity will change society faster than politics." -Victor Pinchuk
BUT I think what you said about art being complex and needing time from introspection and extensive thought is spot on. I also agree that there has been less time and space for this, but I think it is a symptom of social media and the art market. There is definitely a lack of consciousness in contemporary art and artists and the people who are funding the arts are not looking for great artists they're looking for investments. The absence of self expression and scarcity of individualism is where it is falling apart in my opinion-
I am a bot coded by the SteemPlus team to help you make the best of your experience on the Steem Blockchain!
SteemPlus is a Chrome, Opera and Firefox extension that adds tons of features on Steemit.
It helps you see the real value of your account, who mentionned you, the value of the votes received, a filtered and sorted feed and much more! All of this in a fast and secure way.
To see why 3209 Steemians use SteemPlus, install our extension, read the documentation or the latest release : SteemPlus 2.20: Utopian + SteemPlus Partnership = Bigger upvotes.
Steepshot
I always look at things and try to see something different. What is the angle or intent of the creation, is there something hidden? Is the general accepted understanding acurate or is there an underlying message meant to be seen when you look at the creation through the eyes of the artist.
So we see here looking into a crystal ball. But is it? Is it something more?
From another perspective I see not a crystal ball, but I see a void. A void expansion emanating from within as the artist tries to contain it. I notice the eyes are not looking at the “crystal ball” but at the viewer. I notice some of the shading on the hand also suggesting that the “ball” is not actually producing light but consuming it. If this were a negative of a photo the orginal image would show the “ball” as empty blackness. So as I look at this I see the Negative of an orginal photo where the artist is staring ominously as warning that the void is expanding. That in a deep layered paradox, a negative shows the darkness as light. This is what I see, but here’s to be being crazy!
-M
wow, your interpretation is very interesting! Of course this study was made in context of this narritive -->
"...every 50 to 100 years, the being that is the “greatest artist”, is reincarnated and hosted by the body of the most important artist of that century.
every century the Greatest Artist possesses and displays immeasurable excellence that reflects and supports the social and political condition of our world."
I imagine that the narrator is in conversation with the present aka the viewer. The narrator implies that there is no "greatest artist" in the present moment. At the end of the video, a slideshow repeats of the last 5 greatest artists of the past century leading up until present day. Marcel Duchamp (01), Pablo Picasso(02), Salvador Dali(03), Andy Warhol(04), Jeff Koons(05) and then "?".
.
"?" is whoever is willing to fulfill the role that is the "most important artist of the 21st century" and/or the greatest artist(06)
I'm very interested in your interpretation of the crystal ball being a void. Especially in relation to the next greatest artist's current identity being a literal question mark "?". I also love how you noticed that Warhol is making eye contact with the viewer rather than looking into the crystal ball. You have a great eye lol
I would love to know more about your perception of the Warhol study in relation to the Anonymous narrative if you care to share more. I will for sure be opening up this narrative as time goes on, I'm learning more about the work and myself as the creator as time goes on.
Thank you again for your comment!
@art123
I welcome an interesting conversation. Although I’m not sure your question. The Warhol study is something the narrative of the video as one of 5 great artist as I understand. Are you asking if I think Warhol is one of the 5 greatest of the century? I’d say I know less of the narrative from the video and more of the sketch. It’s easier to surmise an assessment of intent from a sketch then it is from the fluid nature of a speech. I thenk generally there is a discussion the creator of video is searching for. Art is dying as form of entertainment. A discussion about art is a good place to start.
-M
@coldicehotwater I was asking your thoughts, on the “void” you recognized in the warhol study in comparison to the use of the question mark at the end of the video. I do like what you said about discussion. Would you say the video would be more open to assessment and easier to follow if it had subtitles? Also if you don’t mind me asking, why do you think art is dying as a form of entertainment?
Unless the video and or the sentiment is coming from warhol, I’m not sure I see a connection. If the view point is from the videos creator to warhols, then my thoughts would just be conjecture.
I would have to understand more of the video creators intent to help with guidance. Although I can say, by using, for lack of better terms, “anonymous themed cinematography, it’s distracting. It is a premise, indeed which definitely serves a purpose as a platform to deliver a message but I don’t say it helps particularly well in this instance. Subtitles are useful but if the speech is delivered properly, it isn’t entirely needed.
The world is descending into chaos. Art, although it may be produced in war is often of the first things to. Art is often slow and complex, requiring thoughts and introspection. There is less and less time for that. Even as a side effect of war, that being death and destruction, art is lost. One can easily look at left over ruins or long lost paintings like Van Goghs “painter on his way to work” or courbets “the stone breakers” and see war destroys not only life, but the very fabric of existence. I suppose a better statement than “art is dying as a form of entertainment” is....
“The arts of the world are the canary in the coal mine of life it self. For as art dies, surely humans will follow.”
-M
Interesting! Well it's not coming from Warhol specifically but it is coming from art, the collective or general voice of art history past. Which through participation Warhol is prominently apart of as well as his predecessors . So that's where I make the connection. Warhol being one of the 5 significant "greatest artists" of art history past [that I'm focusing on in this work] in conversation with art history present about art history future. The idea for this study was conceived from his quote "in the future everyone will be famous for fifteen minutes", which shows that Warhol is capable of "seeing the future" or at least interested in defining it lol I do agree that the viewpoint is conjecture but isn't that what the future is? lol
I've been having trouble with deciding on a visual identity of the narrator and the Anonymous Guy Fawkes avatar was an easy go to because it is of course anonymous lol I do agree that it is a bit distracting and a little far off from the subject matter but I don't know if that is good or bad yet. But your point is definitely noted!
I agree with you about art dying as a form of entertainment but I think for different reasons(if I'm understanding what you said correctly) Art can for sure exist in chaos and can be spawned from it. You have works and practices from artists like Chris Burden, Francisco De Goya, Damien Hirst, Paul Mccarthy and even Picasso's Guernica that have lent from and to a chaotic world.
"Art, freedom and creativity will change society faster than politics." -Victor Pinchuk
BUT I think what you said about art being complex and needing time from introspection and extensive thought is spot on. I also agree that there has been less time and space for this, but I think it is a symptom of social media and the art market. There is definitely a lack of consciousness in contemporary art and artists and the people who are funding the arts are not looking for great artists they're looking for investments. The absence of self expression and scarcity of individualism is where it is falling apart in my opinion-
Congratulations @art123! You have completed the following achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on the badge to view your Board of Honor.
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPWelcome to Steem, @art123!
I am a bot coded by the SteemPlus team to help you make the best of your experience on the Steem Blockchain!
SteemPlus is a Chrome, Opera and Firefox extension that adds tons of features on Steemit.
It helps you see the real value of your account, who mentionned you, the value of the votes received, a filtered and sorted feed and much more! All of this in a fast and secure way.
To see why 3209 Steemians use SteemPlus, install our extension, read the documentation or the latest release : SteemPlus 2.20: Utopian + SteemPlus Partnership = Bigger upvotes.
Hi and welcome to Steemit @art123!
To find all your Steemit Stats, I developed a tool for you called SteemTracked
Welcome to Steem @art123.
Do read A thumb rule for steemit minnows - 50:100:200:25 for starter tips.
Spend time reading Steem Blue Paper to know how Steem blockchain works and if you still have any queries ask them on our Ask me anything about Steemit post and we will try to answer that.
All the Best!!!