Q & A ON THOUGHTS OF THE PROGRESSION OF WEIRD ART

I just had an interesting little diddy of a convo that eye thought eye should share so I cut and pasted it, threw in some spelling errors and posted it here four you:

What is the type of art that's like weird sculptures and stuff?

Hm, you are probably thinking more modern art. I'd say it all bee gan during the 1930s and onwards. Dadaism (Destroying old ideas of traditional art)---> Surrealism (Exploration of dreams and the unreal)---> Conceptualism (Exploration of the idea and not the artwork itself)

That's considered modern?

So basically I would say new art is always the weirdest until it gets old and worn out. Well Oh K eye guess maybe you define modern as knew. So maybe modern means 1990s onwards.Butt if you ask me, true weirdness began in the 1930s roughly, when things were especially made differently because it was clear they needed something new. When things broke away from the stuff they already had seen before. Like away from paintings that are made to look like the things that were painted like the Renaissance paintings, the Da Vinci, the Mona Lisa. Although won could also argue that weird art began with the impressionists which is 1800s??? Not sure.................because they thought impressionism was weird when that first came out... and it's replaced buy something even newer and weirder. Art is always evolving, and the newer should be the weirder, I would say, because it should always be challenging how people think.

Ok so art in general is always going to be weird.

If it's to push the boundaries: YES.
Butt there is always art that stays within parameters too.
But this art can become boring because it is no longer applicable to the time.

Does art ever repeat history, like fashion does?

Hm. Good question, from what i know, it hasn't yet.

It usually takes some aspect of some older art and changes it somehow to evolve. I guess you could say it is always influenced from what came before, but does not repeat.

Yeah I guess fashion's the same way, they take older styles and make it more suited for the new generation. How do people think of new names to call the art everytime something new comes out?

That's another very good question. I would say more often than not the art critic does, and on the very odd occasion the artist.. But even so the art critic usually makes the decision to either use the words of the artist, or disregard the words of the artist. Butt it is usually the people who write about the art who become the choosers of the words on how to describe that art. I guess you could say they are art journalists to be less negative.

Alrighty, I'm going to bed. Just needed a little refresher on the weirdness of art.

That was fun. Thanks for asking. I wish I could teach a class just on those very questions. I have 2 much too say.

Lol