#controversial art

[ter-ror]

Acid Bath When The Kite String Pops CD glitter gif set !!

[postmodernart81]

Nicholaas Chiao, Surreal Personnage, 2024, mixed media

The meaning of this painting is the idea that food consumed by humans is various life forms whose lives are shortened and tormented by us, humans and that this endless consumption leads us to cruelties of wars and conflicts between humans.

[soli-terri]

Are you happy now?

By Stefan Koidl

Digital art

[cantstops1mping]

My thoughts on AI "art" because I was reading an article on it.

I believe AI ‘art’ is not art. No one should ever claim that what the AI made or told them to make is their original idea or claim that it is their art. It disgusts me to see people use AI for a process that is supposed to be creatively inducing. Even when art is ‘ugly’ in someone's opinion you still call it art because you can see the effort put into it, but when it is A.I. you cannot. 

For example the from the article:

If a human were to paint this, no matter how ugly I think it is, I would forever call it art because I would be able to see the effort that was put into it. Since this is A.I. I do not see any effort, all I see is blasphemy and fraud. 

If you want to make art the only thing you need is effort. If people can see the effort you put into the art it will forever be called art.

“Sculptures based on the tool's recommendations.” This from the article specifically made me livid. It’s one thing to tell the A.I. what to make, but letting AI tell you what to make is horrible. The people doing this will end up never being able to be creative again because of their dependency on the AI. When artists allow AI to dictate their artistic direction they risk losing the very thing of what makes art so deeply personal and human.

I don’t think AI can be creative, because it isn’t. A.I. “art” is what the AI thinks people will like based on art it can find on the internet which is plagiarism. AI does violate copyright rules and copyright rules are very outdated. I wish they would fix copyright rules but they don't. AI doesn’t “draw” it makes a collage of already existing artworks and turns it into something new. Those said artworks are copyrighted and if a human cannot make a collage of copyrighted artworks why should a robot? Human creativity is often driven by context, intention, and emotional motivation. AI is driven by nothing. Nothing can’t be art.

Modern and Abstract Art is a whole new discussion. “Art” like a dot on a canvas and splattered lines are not art because there is no real effort put into it. Yes, you made it, but did you really put any real effort into it?

Some people argue that “iT’s ThE mEaNiNg BeHiNd It,” I heavily disagree because what does a red dot even mean? Nothing. It means Nothing. You just want to make money in a way that insults many real artists.

Van Gogh, Picasso, Claude Monet, Frida Kahlo, Alfred Sisley, Andy Warhol, and Edvard Munch did not die for art to be as effortless as it is now.

Thank you for reading! Please tell me what you think about AI "art" and what you think art is!! If you disagree I would like to know why as well!

[bastardcosmonaut]

Take this quiz and put in the tags what controversial work of art you get

[charlesreeza]

Pan and Goat, Marble, 79 CE, discovered in Herculaneum in 1752

This is one of the most famous sculptures at the National Archaeological Museum of Naples. It came from the garden of the Villa of the Papyri outside Herculaneum. It is part of a collection of ancient erotic art that is segregated from the rest of the museum’s collection in what is called the “Secret Cabinet.” For many years it was not open to the public, but in recent years it has been accessible to visitors who are at least 14 years old. The room was locked up when I visited and there was no information about when it would be open. This sculpture was right in the center of one of the open galleries.

Photos by Charles Reeza

[grumpy-potat]

Controversial Public Art

I am not someone who believes art is just meant for museums or for hanging in your homes. Although those are amazing places for them, I feel art is meant to be experienced in aspects of our every day lives. Out in the world as we walk through it. So I am a huge advocate for public art.

Very briefly that is defined as:

"Public Art is Artwork in the public realm, regardless of whether it is situated on public or private property, or whether it is acquired through public or private funding. Public art can be a sculpture, mural, manhole cover, paving pattern, lighting, seating, building facade, kiosk, gate, fountain, play equipment, engraving, carving, fresco, mobile, collage, mosaic, bas-relief, tapestry, photograph, drawing, or earthwork" -Jack Becker Monograph 2004

Public art is a way to beautify your spaces, express the unique aspects of your community and express the different culture and values of the people who live all around you. It can Commemorate events, people, or important groups that and their impacts to society. However, as with all art, you can't avoid controversy. Whether it be from who paid for the installation, to the subject matter. From proper representation, to where the piece is placed. What medium is used in its creation, or who the artist is. All of these things can lead to communities having a strong backlash to artistic pieces being displayed and some even turn to violent outbursts against the art or even their creators.

This is a list today I would like to discuss some controversial public art pieces. Maybe I will go more in depth about some of them later, but these are some big ones that stick in the public conscious today.

Richard Serra's Tilted Arc

This is a 12 foot tall, 120 foot long tiled steal plate that ran through Manhattan's federal plaza from 1981 to 1989. This wall forced people to take an inconvenient route through the plaza for most of the 80's. The goal of the piece was to inspire the viewer to become aware of themselves and their movement through the plaza, but it caused an imposition on government workers. The piece had a lot of support of modern artists,but by 1985 there was a hearing to remove the Arc and a court voted 4-1 to remove it. Due to the artists insistence that it never be displayed again it is now in government storage.

How Ya Like Me Now? by David Hammond

Painted in 1988 and commissioned by the Washington Project for the Arts for an exhibition on black culture and modernism this 14 foot by 16 foot billboard was poorly received to say the least. Local youths did not connect with the artists intended message of how popular culture was co-opting and commodifying black identity and whitewashing it. They interpreted it as racist so they tore the display down with sledgehammers. The piece was later reinstalled with the sledgehammers as part of the final piece incorporating the vandalism and backlash into the final work only this time it is inside the gallery and not on a street corner across from the National Portrait Gallery in D.C.

Just kidding , I couldn't find a good artist photo

Traffic Light Tree by Pierre Vivant

A sculpture originally located in Canary Wharf London in 1998 after a competition run by the Public Art Commissions Agency. It was moved to Billingsgate Market. It stands at 8 meters or 26.24 feet tall and has 75 sets of traffic lights. Vivant stated that it was to represent adjacent plane tree and the restless rhythm of the city. It was installed to replace a dying plane tree in the center of a roundabout, but the controversy arose when motorist confused the installation as an actual traffic light. Despite the initial controversy it has won over the city and is now viewed as one of the most pleasing roundabouts, although it still does cause confusion with tourists.

Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial by Lei Yixin

Built in 2011 this sculpture was controversial from start to finish. Recognized as a master sculptor in China and having sculpted monuments that included the communist leader Mao Zedong, his appointment to sculpt the Dr King statue was protested due to members of human rights organizations decrying the appointment of his visual support of the CCP. Others felt that the statue should have been done by an African American artist. They disliked the use of Chinese granite and not American granite. The quote engraved on the side was abridged in a way that changed the meaning and upset many, to the point where a year later it was removed to now only show abstract striations.

Tree by Paul McCarthy

Displayed in October 2014 at the International Fair of Contemporary Art in Palace Vendôme in Paris this abstraction of a Tree in a reminiscent way of a modern impressionist was a 24 meter or 78.74 foot tall green canvas butt plug shape because he thought they looked similar to trees so he created it as a tree abstraction. He was actually assaulted by someone while installing it, and it was destroyed two days later because some people thought it was offensive to children. Tree was displayed again in 2016 at Paramount Ranch 3 and it was well received by visitors.

Dirty Corner by Anish Kapoor

I feel a list of modern controversial art wouldn't be complete without Anish Kapoor, but my feelings are not why he is on the list. It is because he is a controversial artist. All his controversies deserve a post of their own, so only one is on this list. This art piece was created in 2011, but when it was brought to the Palace of Versailies in 2015 is when it hit its peak. The 60 meter (196.85ft) long and 8 meter(26.25ft) tall cone was described by Kapoor as "the vagina of a queen who was taking power". Critics hated the sexual nature and its nickname is "the Queen's Vagina." The idea was to enter the cone shaped piece and loose your perception of space the deeper you went into it. People vandalized the piece with antisemitic slurs as Kapoor's mother is Jewish. After some legal fights and wanting to leave the vandalism as a statement to the horror and intolerance of humanity, he was ordered to cover or remove the vandalism. He chose to cover it with gold leaf as "a royal response" the piece is no longer on display in France.

Mount Rushmore National Memorial by Gutzon Borglum

Sculpted from 1927 to 1941 This might be a controversial one to add for many Americans. But I wanted to focus on the 20th and 21st centuries and so I feel I would be remiss to not add this monument to America. Carved in the Black Hills of South Dakota by a close friend of Teddy Roosevelt and known Klan associate. This monument to the greatness of American expansionism in the early 20th century is also a monument to how American presidents directly participated, through policy or active participation in the taking and desecration of Native American lands. The Black Hills are considered a Holy Site to the Lakota people, and in the Fort Laramine Treaty of 1868 it was considered exempt from white settlement forever. But gold was discovered so the treaty was violated. Where Mount Rushmore is located is also home to Custer State Park, named after an American general who actively participated in the violation of the Treaty. Mount Rushmore was meant to be a Monument to America's Greatness as embodied by our Presidents, but it at the same time is a symbol of our expansion, treaty violations, and exploitation of the land and people of this nation. It remains a site of protest, the rock itself isn't great for carving and people think about adding more to it. The National Park service have dismissed the idea of altering it at all. People are divided about the site to this day. Some want it destroyed, some want to use it for education, but i have to say the National Park splash page doesn't help much with the education, and some just want the Lakota people to have their Holy Site back. The Lakota won a lawsuit for 17+million dollars, but they also just want the Land and not money as it is a holy site, and they continue to protest. The carving can not be undone, so the site remains a divisive reminder of American History that is often just a footnote in the education of most.

If you can think of any public artwork that you think is controversial please share it! Even if its just a public art work that someone has in their lawn that people in your community cant stand. Art should promote discussion, learning, and growth!

[doylewesleywalls]

Manet's Masterpiece and a Woman before that Great Work by Doyle Wesley Walls Via Flickr:

[thebottomfromhell]

"He had to go very close to see that it was an old man, a very old man, lying face down in the mud, who, in spite of his tremendous efforts, couldn’t get up, impeded by his enormous wings."

"They both looked at the fallen body with a mute stupor. He was dressed like a ragpicker. There were only a few faded hairs left on his bald skull and very few teeth in his mouth, and his pitiful condition of a drenched great-grandfather took away any sense of grandeur he might have had. His huge buzzard wings, dirty and half-plucked, were forever entangled in the mud. They looked at him so long and so closely that Pelayo and Elisenda very soon overcame their surprise and in the end found him familiar. Then they dared speak to him, and he answered in an incomprehensible dialect with a strong sailor’s voice. That was how they skipped over the inconvenience of the wings and quite intelligently concluded that he was a lonely castaway from some foreign ship wrecked by the storm. And yet, they called in a neighbor woman who knew everything about life and death to see him, and all she needed was one look to show them their mistake."

“He’s an angel,” she told them. “He must have been coming for the child, but the poor fellow is so old that the rain knocked him down.”

- Gabriel García Márquez, translation by Gregory Rabassa.

Angel

Controversial artist Sun Yuan and Peng Yu create a hyper-realistic sculpture of a fallen angel. The piece shows an old woman who has fallen from grace. She also has feather-less wings on her back

The artists created the piece using silica gel, fiberglass, stainless steel and woven mesh which is pretty tame for the them. Sun and Peng have been known to use baby cadavers and human fat in a lot of their art. This peice is featured in Beijing

[crazygnomenclature]

This was a super controversial series of comics when I posted them on Reddit a year ago. So much so that Zombie Comic Aura talks about it in a video covering T&E sins.

I still don't regret it, because it sets up a little more complexity to Tiff and Eve's relationship. I would have made a few changes if I had thought ahead a little more, but I mention that in Aura's the video.

More Tiff & Eve on Webtoon. Support the comic on Patreon.

[d-does-art]

*crawls out of art block dungeon*

Here's a page of a comic I've been thinking of. I don't know if I'll finish it, but posting might help motivate me. Or I'll move on to the next thing, haha.   

[artoflevity]

runs in the family.

[halloweenorangesoda]

HE HAS MY VOTE❗️❗️❗️❗️

[mochapao]

mayjack :3

[officialspec]

these guys again (ocs)

[coffebits]

The truth is out guys 👁️👁️

More Princess Bride AU cus why not.