How to analyze a work of art according to Ellenism

 First, let's go back to the past and make a paradox about current art.  In the past, art had a purpose, while in cave paintings the mystical character, the search for the transcendent, the desire for everything to work as if it were a prayer was seen.

 In these ancient cultures, in addition to the divine character of life, art had a ritual function in burials.  As well as being a channel of prayers for things to go well, as when primitive man painted animals wishing the hunt was good in the morning.

 "Art is prayer."

 Only here do you realize the origin of art and its true function, which is also to lead us to the transcendent, to the divine.

 Then art started to have two more functions: to serve as a historical record, that is, to portray the people, myths and events of the time, art was a means of registering history as a book.

 Finally, art had the function of beautifying, bringing happiness to a place to be appreciated by people.  Ready, reaching these points, you throw 90% of the pseudo art in the trash.  And it is reconnected with true art.

 If a work of art does not elevate you to the divine, if it does not serve, records and transmits important information, if it does not beautify, it does not bring happiness, this art does not meet the requirements to be considered a high and sublime art.

 But, is it still art?  Yes, all human culture is art, but as I said before, not all art is worthy of praise.

 Let's look at the urinal that a guy put in a museum, and said it was art.  He was correct, it is art as a human culture, but let's analyze the level of this art, give a grade from 1 to 10 ..

 Let's say that good art and technique must be between 5 and 7, if reaching 8 is exceptional, and reaching 9 is great.

 For example, Pollock's art was great because his way of painting was pioneering, nowadays I see thousands of artists inspired by Pollock, that is to say he marked with his style.

 Another example is impressionism, although the themes of the paintings were common at the time, the way of painting brought something new, something that in fact impressed in rare beauty, so this movement was brilliant for bringing something new.

 Van Gogh, Mondrian, Miró, Klimt, all brought new techniques and inspirations that are why they are so praised even if they were inspired by something earlier they brought creativity.

 I don't particularly like Picasso, I think it's overrated, I think cubism is aesthetically ugly, but I recognize that Picasso marked with his style, in fact he was inspired by African culture and perfected his technique, I don't really like it, even so I see dozens of artists painting  like him, meaning he was a pioneer and I admire that.

 Another artist that I also think is great and I like his work is Warhol, as you can see I am not an old man so grumpy, because although this artist seems as futile as he liked to consider himself, he revolutionized the way of making art, making it popular,  his composition of colors fulfills the purposes of the initial art which is to embellish and bring joy, I am always happy to see Warhol's work and after him much of the design, advertising were inspired by his work, and the world has changed today.

 Now let's look at the urinal that a guy put in a museum and said it was art.

 You will notice that the only creativity was to put this object in a museum, so my note on the creativity and technique of this art would be 1.0, but using the parameters of the past we can come to the conclusion that it is an art pee like the goal of  your object.

 Does the urinal as an art elevate the human being?

 Do you bring anything useful?

 Does it beautify any place?

 Do people feel good looking at this object in the museum?

 I'm sure that for most people, even those who don't have the courage to speak, know that it's a grotesque art style.

 So using these parameters, plus the level of creativity that did not exceed 1.0, we sincerely realized that this type of art should not be in any museum, nor have its creator as a great artist and recognition.  Worst of all, students are forced to memorize these bizarre things in schools.

 Ah, noble but my professor of art, of sociology, the critics say he is brilliant.

 I don't care about the distorted view of people in the mainstream of today's culture.

 I said a great professor, critic ..

 Does not matter!  Humanity is regressing in evolution and as a result we have a garbage culture today, just see how violence, crimes, depression only increases by this relativistic view of the world and art.

 When everything is art in the highest sense of the word, art ends up becoming nothing, and nothing becomes empty of people, and empty people live unhappy lives, and live so empty that one hour their existence does not  sense, until they can't take it anymore and take their own life when they have courage, when they don't have courage, they live like zombies vegetating.  And this is all linked to current relativism.

 Because everything has become empty, and when there is only emptiness, why continue to live?  This is so true that even some empty artists of empty arts, could not stand the emptiness itself, and committed suicide.  Throwing your emptiness into the emptiness.


 Art was born from the function of bringing to the human being the elevated, bringing a voice to this world and the eternal beauty of his soul.  Art can and should be conceptualized and even given a note without relativism.

 What is certain is certain, there is a better and healthier way of living in the same way that we do not drink pee instead of water, because water has the function of being ingested, and pee the function of being expelled, this is the  natural order of things.

 But, if you want to know if an art is genius or not, give notes related to creativity, technique, beauty and elevation.


 Although Picasso said that copying makes a good artist, or some bullshit because he was limited, for me creativity is fundamental, I hate to see millions of artists and everyone looks the same, of course several people can paint a rose, but you can see the difference in  a real artist, for a copier even painting the same theme.

 "Genius create, mediocre copy".


 Here comes the characteristic feature, when I see a classic sculpture or a Van Gogh I clearly perceive a good technique in the hands of these artists, even if with different styles.


 The world already has too many misfortunes, why do I want to see horrible things in my room or in my living room?  Or poop in a can or a urinal in a museum?  I want to see beauty in this world as Robério Britto says "art is for joy" and in that he fulfills his role well.


 This is where you feel the transcendental function of art, where you can feel connected with something beyond that reality, I remember when I cried looking at a painting by Van Gogh, spending a long time watching klimt paintings or not knowing why the work of  Mondrian is so interesting when I look.

 Perhaps this is why some paintings from the past were so loved years later, while a large part of the population only pretends to like many contemporary bizarre things.

 "When everything is art, art becomes nothing".

 Now analyze the work as follows:

 Technique: weak 0, good 1

 Creativity: weak 1, good 2, great 3

 Beauty: weak 1, good 2, excellent 3

 Elevation: weak 1, good 2, excellent 3

 Now you have a parameter to analyze a work of art, instead of depending on critics to say what is good or bad for you.  Trust your judgment and math.

 Aisi ~

 * Ellenism, artistic movement created by Ricardo Rangels with the aim of bringing the greatness of art back to our reality.  The motto of this movement is "Art is the voice of the soul".

Nenhum comentário:

Postar um comentário


copyright © . all rights reserved. designed by Color and Code

grid layout coding by