Talk:Modern art

message: I think this first paragraph has some problems:
"MOST of the artistic production" ?  -- is not an
accurate statement. Perhaps it could be changed to
"most of what is now recognized as canonical"
::"Modern art refers to the then new approach to art where it was no longer important to represent a subject realistically — the invention of photography had made this function of art obsolete."
Did Impressionist painters "represent a subject less realistically" than earlier painters like Velasquez,
Delacroix, Tiepolo etc ?  Did they, or their supporters,
ever claim that they did ?
And if "photography had made this function of art obsolete" - then why have some of the highest paid artists of the 20th (and 21st) century been portrait painters ?
:Who is paid the most is not the typically the factor in determining which artists most define an era. Indeed often the artists recalled most are the ones least appreciated in their own time.
::"Instead, artists started experimenting with new ways of seeing, with fresh ideas about the nature, materials and functions of art, often moving further toward abstraction."
But more often than not -- not moving further toward abstraction.  Abstraction is only one of many strategies used in this period.--Mountshang 15:51, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The original paragraph which contained this sentence: "Modern art refers to the then new approach to art where it was no longer important to represent a subject realistically — the invention of photography had made this function of art obsolete" was preferable to the recent edit. Similarly the recent change to Criticism. Modernist 22:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction

message: Surely modern art refers to the use of modern techniques such as acrylic paint, video, installation etc. What I think is meant by "Modern art" here is "Modernist art". There is a need for a new category ie Modernism or modernist art
:Consulting a dictionary reveals that modern art is indeed the correct term. Increasingly, the term modern is losing its sense of "contemporary" and referring instead to early twentieth century existence. Theshibboleth 06:56, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern Art

message: The refimrove template at the head of the page would seem to obviate the need for a verication tag cluttering nearly every sentence—even a sentence asserting that there's more video art in galleries today than there was in the immediate post-WWII years. This article could be better sourced, and will be. But given the length of time the tags have been in place, and given the difficulty of finding retrospective sources that fully support some of the lines that were tagged here, it seems better to move them to the talk page until they can be replaced with fresh material properly sourced.  The controversial lines deleted stated:
*the 19th century art patron preferred accuracy in artistic depiction, combined with idealism 
*failure by the artist to meet these expectations had economic & social consequences. Ewulp (talk) 08:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  verification tag reduction 

message: The lede as it now stands is inferior to the earlier version (although of course reliable sources to fully support the definition were lacking). That the term "Modern art" is usually understood to describe 20th century & sometimes also late 19th century art goes without saying--and is therefore rarely said, hence the surprising difficulty in locating it through secondary sources. It's like trying to source "Buster Keaton never walked on the moon": you can easily find a good source for a list of those who have walked on the moon, and note that his name is absent, but that's original research. Google hits for the term "moden art" or such phrases as  "meant by modern art" make clear that the term is popularly understood to mean contemporary and 20th century art; it rarely extends back to Jan Steen or Hyacinthe Rigaud. My own perusal of books & articles at hand suggests that this term as used by art historians describes 19th-20th c developments in almost every instance. Online, Encarta supports the prevalent usage here but is not the ideal authority to cite. I hope to resolve this matter with a library visit next week. On the other hand, the 6 remaining sources cited for the "17th century onward" definition lack page numbers, and need a closer look. For instance, Dempsey writes of "vocabulary used to define modern art - from Impressionism to Installation, from the Nabis to Neo-Expressionism" and surveys no art predating Impressionism. Ewulp (talk) 23:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definitions 

message: "===After World War II===
It was only after World War II, though, that the U.S. became the focal point of new artistic movements. The 1950s and 1960s saw the emergence of Abstract Expressionism, Color field painting, Pop art, Op art, Hard-edge painting, Minimal art, Lyrical Abstraction, Postminimalism, Photorealism and various other movements. In the late 1960s and the 1970s, Land art, Performance art, Conceptual art, and other new art forms had attracted the attention of curators and critics, at the expense of more traditional media.Mullins 2006, p. 14. Larger installations and performances became widespread. 
Around that period, a number of artists and architects started rejecting the idea of "the modern" and created typically Postmodern works.
By the end of the 1970s, when cultural critics began speaking of "The End of Painting" (the title of a provocative essay written in 1981 by Douglas Crimp), new media art had become a category in itself, with a growing number of artists experimenting with technological means such as video art.Mullins 2006, p. 9. Painting assumed renewed importance in the 1980s and 1990s, as evidenced by the rise of neo-expressionism and the revival of figurative painting.Mullins 2006, pp. 14–15."
Modern art stops before ww2. This should be removed.Research Method (talk) 06:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. If you have a reliable source that says Modern art ended before 1939, I can find one that says it ended in 1968. We can't endorse one date while rejecting all others. Ewulp (talk) 23:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A section examining the various definitions would be viable. Ty 23:56, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal for removal 

message: With regard to where in the list to place Georgia O'Keeffe (GOK): she was indeed active before WW1: already 18 years old in 1905, 
* she studied painting at the Art Institute of Chicago during 1905-1906; then
* moved to New York where she worked within the then-growing community of abstract expressionists;
* from 1907-1908 she was at the Art Student's League in NY with William Merritt Chase, F. Luis Mora, and Kenyon Cox; 
* 1908-1911 she moved to Chicago to work as free-lance commercial artist, then to Charlottesville where she took over a teaching schedule and charge of the Art Department at Chatham Episcopal Institute in 1912;
* in 1912 back to NY and took classes with Alon Bement and Arthur Wesley Dow at Columbia;
* in 1912-1914 she went to Amarillo Texas and taught art through 1914 with summers spent teaching in Virgina; 
* 1914-1915 went to Columbia in NYC and spent time painting and in museums and seeing shows;
* in 1915 went to South Carolina where it is nearly universally agreed amongst her biographers that she hit her stride;
* in 1916 began her correspondence with Stieglitz who was already aware of her work, then went back to Texas to be hired as the head of the art department at West Texas State Normal College.
* in 1917 Stieglitz opens "Georgia O’Keeffe", the first one-person show of her work, at 291 gallery;
* then in 1918 she gets the Spanish flu and upon recovery goes back to NYC, already an established artist.
As the U.S. didn't enter the war until 1918, and as GOK was already an established artist by then, she should be included in the pre-WW1 group. Her ouevre for this pre-war period is scant but it nonetheless exists. We should perhaps not measure who should be included in which time-period by the mere volume of their output at a particular time as we may not be accurately representing who was actually working at a given time. Instead, we should defer to established references and biographers with regard to where someone belongs in the larger picture of time. In GOK's case, she was active and working before WWI, her work is most prodigious after this period but her style during her most prodigious period is informed by this earlier period, especially during 1915 in South Carolina.
Sctechlaw (talk) 19:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not an article on Georgia O'Keeffe. She was like many other artists listed born during the 1880s largely unknown, conventional, and just getting started by the time Picasso and Braque revolutionized modern painting. By the end of WWI other movements began to resonate including the group that is associated with O'Keeffe. Modernist (talk) 20:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Of course its not about O'Keeffe. My point with O'Keeffe is simply that she and her contemporaries, Davis, Dove, & Hartley, were all active and showing before WW1 and as such should be included in the pre-WW1 group. American Modernists were experimentalists and evolved in the crucible of pre-WW1 art circles, especially Stieglitz's, so we should put them in the timeframe in which they came together as a group with similarities.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sctechlaw (talk • contribs) 11:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern Art's Artists

message: Modern art was one of the first times that the general public looked on art as a thing that they couldn't understand and felt that it was crafted with the skill of a six year old. Does this have any relevance in this page? 
What does modern art reflect about the current mood in western society? Does it show its futile search for individual identity through the production and consumption of meaningless art pieces ment to express uniqueness and different thinking?
When reading about the Dada movement I learned, that it was a response to the chaos of WWI and the destruction of the idea that enlightenment thinking would lead to a better utopian society. What was the cause of the post modern movement?   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.178.205 (talk) 20:52, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: the great separation

message: Modern art was CIA 'weapon' by Frances Stonor Saunders. It's an old article. Komitsuki (talk) 10:16, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder how notable this is, should it be mentioned, myself and some others wonder why things like Jackson Pollack tossing paint against a wall is considered art. CIA funding  it to confuse the soviets helps explain it. Popish Plot (talk) 18:28, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern art is a weapon? 

message: As the new Wikipedia-in-Residence fostering institutional cooperation at the the Museum of Modern Art, I'd love to invite all interested Wikipedians to come participate!  Let me also know if you have any further questions about this project (see also Wikipedia:GLAM/MoMA/Members).--Pharos (talk) 15:59, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seeking Members for [[Wikipedia:GLAM/MoMA|WikiProject MoMA]] 

message: We don't add everyone who has an opinion or point of view about a subject. Because a person does not like modern art (there are many 1000s) we don't create separate sections to accomodate those opinions especially from lay persons with no notable expertise in this subject...Modernist (talk) 18:05, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Refusing to hear critique from laymen? I thought art was for everyone, not just the select few insiders who pretend to be experts on how a garbage can is "art".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.182.53.245 (talk) 16:47, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Critics

message: Why is "sculpture" a category under "Art Movements and artist groups"?  It's not like we've classified most of the other groups by their media (with the exception of ones like "video art", where the medium is the basis for the movement).  We don't have categories of "Paintings" or "Pencil-drawings" listed as art movements.
Also, "sculpture" is hardly specific to modern art.  Shouldn't each of the artists listed under "sculpture" be categorized by some other group- or movement-affiliation?  Picasso was a cubist and whatknot...not just a "sculptor".
68.190.119.92 (talk) 06:29, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that's it's not ideal. However, in modern art, sculpture is often treated as a separate entity, much like a movement, even though there are clear movements in sculpture and sculpture is found in a number of movements. However, I'm not certain how we can include the information. Are there other terms we can use? freshacconci talktalk 22:41, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Sculpture?

message: The way that referencing has occurred makes this article ripe for some restructuring to take advantage of shortened footnotes & explanatory notes. I plan to proceed with the following steps.
# Rename References to Sources Rename Notes to References. Create a new Notes section with .
# Separation of explanatory notes from references by using . These would display in the new Notes section
# Converting the citations in the renamed Sources section to  format & adding appropriate parameters. I hope to find some online versions, for instance.
# Convert the ref tags that have just the name/year/page format to shortened footnotes. For example, Atkins 1990, p. 102. would become .
Steps 1 & 2 are simple. Steps 3 & 4 are iterative in that typically one  conversion occurs at a time, with  conversions then occurring simultaneously or directly thereafter.
The end result will look like the examples in Help:Explanatory notes#Shortened footnotes with separate explanatory notes with references. Peaceray (talk) 17:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I competed the above tasks. Peaceray (talk) 18:37, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

text: Peaceray (talk) 22:37, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

text: Peaceray (talk) 22:36, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restructuring notes, references, & citations 

message: For H. Harvard Arnason' s History of Modern Art: Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, Photography, there are four editions / ISBNs. That is just unnecessary. I plan to whittle it down to the one actually cited & to add an OCLC #. Let the reader navigate to Worldcat to find the other editions. Listing them all here just takes up space! Peaceray (talk) 00:20, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Peaceray (talk) 22:37, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiple editions / ISBNs for Arnason book

message: There are incomplete citations for two books & two articles that are footnotes. To be consistent, I plan to convert these to full citations & shortened footnotes, then add the  template. Peaceray (talk) 18:37, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Peaceray (talk) 22:36, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Additional references to be converted

message: Multiple ISBNs for the same ditation is superfluous. One ISBN & one OCLC, particularly the latter, should be sufficient for finding other editions of a book. I plan to remove the extras as I convert books to  format. Peaceray (talk) 01:34, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiple ISBNs per citation in the Further reading section

message: In the "History of Art" sidebar, modern art is preceded by medieval art. This makes sense if modern art is the art produced during the modern era.
However, in the introduction it is stated that modern art is a period starting at about the 1860s. This leaves a gap between 1500 and 1860 which is not covered as period in art history in Wikipedia. In my opinion, this stems from confusing an artistic movement with a period. 
EctoplasmicLapels (talk) 19:27, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , Fixed, with the caveat that this is only describes western art, and does not provide a global perspective. Vexations (talk) 20:33, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: There is a 360 Year gap in Wikipedia's art History

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Modernist art and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 18#Modernist art until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Veverve (talk) 19:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Modernist art" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: — Assignment last updated by MarvinKano011 (talk) 01:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: ARH 371_The TransAtlantic_Cross-Cultural Representations