Why is popular art considered to be bad art?

john -

sorry to be part of the "great-unwashed" but i am partial to the crying clowns, and the v'elvis ( velvet elvis). it isn't bad art, it is just art for the masses ... if it were bad art it would be here: http://www.glyphs.com/moba/ (moba= museum of bad art)

:) john

I'm rather fond of those poker playing dogs! :-)

Remy, Grow Up? Never!! As to why should I be concerned about what art critics espouse? Because 'they' write the textbooks on art that my kids will be studying someday, because 'they' award the grants to museums, because 'they' buy what gets parked on public property with my modest(ha!) contribution to the public coffers, and 'they' get to rag in the syndicated press, television(and on the internet) people whose work I enjoy and the rest of the art gurus just roll over an thier collective bellies and agree with the criticism du jur. Such critics dismiss the work of more popular photograpers as insignificant but can't or won't explain the significance such work has on the Public's embrace of such images(aside from a callous dismissal citing something like 'lack of taste' or copycat buying) I'm really just curious as to how this state of affairs got so imbedded in society.-Cheers!

One of my favorite artists is M. C. Escher, who is unfortunately not that well appreciated by the art world.

I bring up the point once again of the recent van Gogh discovery. The painting was valued at $100, until they decided it was an unsigned van Gogh, then it sold for $400,000 or so. If only da Vinci had painted those dogs playing poker, it would be great art. But if you or I paint the Mona Lisa, it's just another $5 painting at a garage sale.

John,

I don't think Remy meant you. He just did not articulate thorougly. I believe he was directing his feeling towards those who do not think for themselves. If he gave a moments thought I'm sure he recognised that you were posing a very good question.

Pop art has always been considered cheap and vulgar. Often it is. Andy Warhol comes to mind. But then Van Gough was not really appreciated in his time. He insisted on painting just what was before him on any given day. Some of his paintings are truly astonishing if you give them a moment. The man WAS a genius in many ways.

I think Picasso was a great artist but he did a great mound of cheap toss off crap just to make a buck in his life. I think some of the architecture we are seeing today will go down in history as some of the nastiest wet dreams ever foisted upon the public but the guys that are doing it right now are the top of their field.

Generally, to my mind, 'art' is a vast wasteland in this day and age but every once in a while you find the most perfect oasis and it makes it all worth while.

Stephen, Interesting! I can see money coming into play, but perhaps more in the realm of faculty tenures and sculptures made with fesces. Consider this: a thousands of people go out one December and decide, unbeknown to each other, that they all want a calender illustrated with circa 1950s black and white photos of say, Half Dome. They do this not because some interior decorator on HGTV did it, not because say, Jennifer Anniston has one on the set of "Friends." or the automobile club magazine published an article on Whatshisname's tripod holes in Yosemite. All these calenders were sold because the Public has a genuine connection with the images---none of these calenders will ever be worth more than they were on the December day. In fact, come February they will be 50% off. Ten months later the calenders are either trashed, or saved. Some of the images decorate Dilbert cubicles in an office building or are tacked up in dorm rooms. Maybe some are even put into frames and hung in people's homesThe frames would have more monetary worth than the calender picture!)---substitute babies in flowerpots or even overgrown Hansel and Gretel thatched cottages if you prefer, but my point is, why does the art world feel threatened when a large percentage of the public embraces an image, or a body of work, by a photographer(or other artist)? I don't mean to endorse Adams or Geddes, or that Kincaid guy(but maybe Churchill and his poker playing Dogs) but I am just trying to figure out where Art is headed---not just why the popular images garner critcism, but why the people who enjoy those images are criticized for doing what comes, to them, naturally: enjoying art!?--------cheers!

Lack of rigour. Lack of vision

Scott, Good point!(Several good points!) Your observation that Art today is a vast wasteland goes along with what I've been thinking--not that there isn't great Art being created---there certainly is---but that it maybe in today's world it has to be validated in some way by someone who is considered an 'expert' in order to be worthwhile. This seems to me to be contrary to what makes Art "worthwhile." The cave painting in France of a hunting party needs no explaination, nor does a fertility statue from Africa, a totem pole from B.C. or the Pieta in Rome. All these things I would call Art and certainly worthy. I find thatched Hanzel and Gretal cottages a bit much, but I think this is due to the simple observation that there is a finite number of ways a thatched hanzel and gretel cottage can be portrayed in the same style(yes,like Half Dome) In fact I do agree with Remy that in my own feeble attempts at making photographs, I'm not really concerned with critics who have thier heads up where the sun don't shine---of course there is criticism I respect and am grateful for, but if a critic took to task someone for enjoying a print because they in some way connected with it, I wouldn't consider such criticism legitimate.

John,

Speaking of Hansel and Grettle cottages... Let's imagine a real one. Yes the legitimate item full scale ... on the verge of a wood next to a high alpine meadow with the Matterhorn in the distance ... or Pikes Peak, if you will. Would that be art? 'twould to me. Just a real thatched roof is art to me. .... (give my eye teeth ... {not to mention the river-stone hearth and the hand-hewn oak mantle}) Let us not even think about the hand quarried rough slate at the entry way and the stained glass border round the entry door light.

I think it is all tied up with actual 'artistry' ... and blood, sweat and tears. Or sometimes true genius along with the foregoing.