• LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    13 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
      ·
      13 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
        2
        ·
        12 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