i looked at Nitsch's paintings and i did not see anything suggestive there - he's a decent painter. not as good as me of course, but am i missing something here?
I wonder if there's any chance that law enforcement is, or ever will be, looking into this art - that isn't art to - but is presented as art, using logic that no reasonable person could find any use for. I read that art can be easily used for money laundering. Or that buying a really expensive piece-of-shit art product is an easy way to hide money that's actually spent on other "products." I wish I knew more about how this works, within the current legal system. All the financial complexities surrounding art gallery sales and charitible contributions, the privacy rights of buyers and donors, how much information is required by the IRS and if that info is legally available to LE, and what's available to the public.
I'm not talking about the things that are related to truly precious art, with obvious merit and resale value. That's something different. There's a whole lot that's worth questioning about today's contemporary art, and the recognition and validity it's given TODAY. I think about the groundbreaking art by people like Andy Warhol and Jackson Pollack, not really alll that long ago. That's the kind of art that raised eyebrows all over the art world, and made the news. Art students revered and imitated the work of those artists, because there was much merit in their new use of subject and non-subject matter, color, technique... That groundbreaking art seemed ridiculous and fun to me, and I saw no harm in it at all.
There are, of course, many artists producing beautiful work today, as always. But there are no new remarkable "movements" in fine art painting and sculpture that I know of. Crafters win in new ideas and popularity.
Galleries who happily and willingly support artists' depictions of human beings in situations of pornography, torture, gore, and violence, children included, and defend that horrific shit as art, deserve LE scrutiny. This garbage is only recognized in certain circles, and will never make art history, but hopefully make great fodder for future documentaries about the demise of criminal activity. Thanks for listening.
mollysbrownpizza ago
gross-these people are pigs
angry_mob ago
i looked at Nitsch's paintings and i did not see anything suggestive there - he's a decent painter. not as good as me of course, but am i missing something here?
LacunaPerpetual ago
Hermann Nitsch is a sick motherfucker and I'm pretty sure he is a Satanist. https://youtu.be/ns2p-FGF6qs
angry_mob ago
wow! what a creepazoid! sheesh! i'm gonna have to say that's NOT art. (o:
rooting4redpillers ago
I wonder if there's any chance that law enforcement is, or ever will be, looking into this art - that isn't art to - but is presented as art, using logic that no reasonable person could find any use for. I read that art can be easily used for money laundering. Or that buying a really expensive piece-of-shit art product is an easy way to hide money that's actually spent on other "products." I wish I knew more about how this works, within the current legal system. All the financial complexities surrounding art gallery sales and charitible contributions, the privacy rights of buyers and donors, how much information is required by the IRS and if that info is legally available to LE, and what's available to the public.
I'm not talking about the things that are related to truly precious art, with obvious merit and resale value. That's something different. There's a whole lot that's worth questioning about today's contemporary art, and the recognition and validity it's given TODAY. I think about the groundbreaking art by people like Andy Warhol and Jackson Pollack, not really alll that long ago. That's the kind of art that raised eyebrows all over the art world, and made the news. Art students revered and imitated the work of those artists, because there was much merit in their new use of subject and non-subject matter, color, technique... That groundbreaking art seemed ridiculous and fun to me, and I saw no harm in it at all.
There are, of course, many artists producing beautiful work today, as always. But there are no new remarkable "movements" in fine art painting and sculpture that I know of. Crafters win in new ideas and popularity.
Galleries who happily and willingly support artists' depictions of human beings in situations of pornography, torture, gore, and violence, children included, and defend that horrific shit as art, deserve LE scrutiny. This garbage is only recognized in certain circles, and will never make art history, but hopefully make great fodder for future documentaries about the demise of criminal activity. Thanks for listening.
littlemrsMAGA ago
Looks an awful lot like organ harvesting.
SayWhatNOWAY ago
These freaks all need to be arrested and sent to Gitmo! No trials!