Modernism was born from the ashes of WWI. It was a Marxist-Jewish fuck-you to the old order. It seeks to destroy morale and punish those who believe in the Western ideal. It is civic and cultural violence.
It was born before then. Impressionism and Post-Impressionism (1880s - 1900) were the seeds of all modern art, as they rejected the traditional construct of the academy and "high art" (form, design, romanticism), in exchange for the abstract and glorification of everyday.
And like every other progressive movement that wasn't enough, so you got futurism and truly the dumbest art period of all time - dadaism - and finally modernism and post-modernism.
Impressionism is a tough call. Is it degenerate, or based? On the one hand, you have a group of artists who long for pure art, away from the the pompous world of patronage and portraiture. The en plein air movement is certainly based, and almost monastic in artists like Monet. Mary Cassat’s celebration of mothers and children is based, as is Degas’ studies of the innocent beauty of young ballerinas. Cezanne’s lovely apples are hypnotic and wonderful. Hard to say anything bad about him, really.
On the other hand, you have the degenerate and syphilitic midget Henri Toulouse-Lautrec, who reveled in the debauchery of Paris cafe society and absinthe. And Édouard Manet, who was nothing more than a fancy pornographer. Van Gogh was simply insane. They should have gotten him help.
Didn't expect to get into the weeds of art history on .win, but here we are lol.
I'm not saying you throw the baby out with the bath water regarding Impressionism and some of the Impressionists, I'm merely stating that the progressive art movement started there, which is true. And like all "progressive" movements, there is no end.
At some point you end up with mental patients menstruating on a canvas while orangutans throw feces at it.
Modernism was born from the ashes of WWI. It was a Marxist-Jewish fuck-you to the old order. It seeks to destroy morale and punish those who believe in the Western ideal. It is civic and cultural violence.
It was born before then. Impressionism and Post-Impressionism (1880s - 1900) were the seeds of all modern art, as they rejected the traditional construct of the academy and "high art" (form, design, romanticism), in exchange for the abstract and glorification of everyday.
And like every other progressive movement that wasn't enough, so you got futurism and truly the dumbest art period of all time - dadaism - and finally modernism and post-modernism.
Trump saying fuck you to postmodernist and deconstructivist architects is beautiful.
Impressionism is a tough call. Is it degenerate, or based? On the one hand, you have a group of artists who long for pure art, away from the the pompous world of patronage and portraiture. The en plein air movement is certainly based, and almost monastic in artists like Monet. Mary Cassat’s celebration of mothers and children is based, as is Degas’ studies of the innocent beauty of young ballerinas. Cezanne’s lovely apples are hypnotic and wonderful. Hard to say anything bad about him, really.
On the other hand, you have the degenerate and syphilitic midget Henri Toulouse-Lautrec, who reveled in the debauchery of Paris cafe society and absinthe. And Édouard Manet, who was nothing more than a fancy pornographer. Van Gogh was simply insane. They should have gotten him help.
Didn't expect to get into the weeds of art history on .win, but here we are lol.
I'm not saying you throw the baby out with the bath water regarding Impressionism and some of the Impressionists, I'm merely stating that the progressive art movement started there, which is true. And like all "progressive" movements, there is no end.
At some point you end up with mental patients menstruating on a canvas while orangutans throw feces at it.
I was not expecting this critique of Impressionism on a post mocking the screaming soyboy and discussing guns.
I must admit I have a soft spot for Italian Futurism.
Perversion of the arts is a classic jewish marxist play to demoralize people.