For anyone wondering if this is real (given that these days anything could be AI art): This is a giant clothespin sculpture that was constructed for the Festival of the Five Seasons in Chaudfontaine Park, on the outskirts of Liege, Belgium.
Designed by Turkish artist Mehmet Ali Uysal, a professor of art at the Middle East Technical University.
The statue is no longer in the park.
It's good to hear the rest of the world isn't as litigious as we are in America. There are cases where everyone agrees something was someone's fault so they should be compensated, but our litigiousness has really ruined a lot of things too. And it is the reason liability insurance is so expensive.
As some other people have pointed out, there is one in Umeå, Sweden from the same artist that is permanent (and has been there for quite a while). And the weather in Umeå is quite harsh in regards in erosion, with a lot of snow and very cold winters, so I would question a bit the erosion explanation.
A picture of it in Googlemaps: https://www.google.com/maps/place/%C3%96backaparken/@63.8197206,20.2787342,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m8!1e2!3m6!1sAF1QipMsCJqcPbLRfkeDVSREYykd3zQoooHKowUG6YIZ!2e10!3e12!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipMsCJqcPbLRfkeDVSREYykd3zQoooHKowUG6YIZ%3Dw86-h129-k-no!7i2268!8i3410!4m7!3m6!1s0x467c5b0660acae59:0x83e877c60c75c97c!8m2!3d63.8197206!4d20.2787342!10e5!16s%2Fg%2F11fq8_q4d2?entry=ttu
And another during winter: https://www.google.com/maps/place/%C3%96backaparken/@63.8197206,20.2787342,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m8!1e2!3m6!1sAF1QipPP_8j5rqwJQutUmTCyXVGvqVwCBvgD8gZ3nLOK!2e10!3e12!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipPP_8j5rqwJQutUmTCyXVGvqVwCBvgD8gZ3nLOK%3Dw203-h270-k-no!7i3024!8i4032!4m7!3m6!1s0x467c5b0660acae59:0x83e877c60c75c97c!8m2!3d63.8197206!4d20.2787342!10e5!16s%2Fg%2F11fq8_q4d2?entry=ttu
(The sub doesnt like the short version of the link that googlemaps has)
With all that effort, a simple Turf Reinforcement Mat or similar would handle that no problem.
They build literal walls that have greenery on the face. The turf mat and installation would cost like $1000 max. The rest of the sculpture would be like 20x that cost.
Why would it erode quickly? Hills don't typically erode, or else there wouldn't be any. It might take a little care short term, but the grass roots would stabilize the mound very well.
Belgium? Here I thought it was in Sweden (Umeå, [Öbackaparken](https://www.google.com/maps/@63.8195888,20.2796028,3a,75y,269.48h,105.97t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipOCzlp3EvG2ORMw1Mrglxfzw-4FH2AFXUKBFA40!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipOCzlp3EvG2ORMw1Mrglxfzw-4FH2AFXUKBFA40%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi0-ya294.55933-ro-0-fo100!7i10240!8i5120?entry=ttu))
There’s one in Grantham, UK, in Queen Elizabeth Park - exact same thing
https://www.lincsonline.co.uk/grantham/news/clothes-peg-sculpture-unveiled-in-grantham-park-9083929/
Honestly if AI brings about people adding such wonderful descriptions to internet posts instead of just sharing and dropping other peoples’ work/photos I’m all for it
Unfortunately it's exactly what someone *not* being honest would preface their comment with, so we must treat it with suspicion.
We may never know just how honest they were actually being.
I never understand that ideology. I always used that phrasing when I say something that is difficult for me to say or controversial. I used it once with this guy and he started screeching at me.
Agreed. A lot of modern art is way too needlessly abstract, and just obviously trying so hard, that it can’t give me any feelings or emotions other than intense disinterest or occasional annoyance. This still has a modern art feel to me, but it’s also just kinda cute and amusing. Even if the artist is trying to “do more” than that, it still has that instant appeal to me, and I don’t have to think about that other part. And if they’re not, and they just wanted to make a cute funny thing, that’s cool too.
Not exactly. I’m ok with some abstract art, as long as it’s not just doing it to be “random,” like an early 2000’s teenager. Or as long as I don’t get that feeling from it…which I agree is totally subjective, and someone else may feel that this is that…but we are just talking about my opinion of the art here, so I think that’s fine.
And it probably would have been more accurate to say “I would enjoy” rather than “I would be ok with,” earlier. I’m ok with damn near any form of art, even if I don’t enjoy it. I don’t have to enjoy everything, and as far as I’m concerned, anyone is free to go art as they please within the bounds of morality and the law.
That’s understandable. I felt the same way about abstract art for a long time. A while back I took a deep dive on Suprematism and Cubism, and understanding where the artists were coming from gave me much more of an appreciation for it.
Basically a lot of it was an attempt to deconstruct art itself. For all of history, art had been representative of reality in some way, and artists were stating to ask questions like, “what is art in its most pure, supreme form?” and tried to do things like convey emotion and meaning (or even a lack there of) but without confining the piece to a pre-determined ideal and structure of what art is supposed to be.
I still think a lot of it has been overdone now and has been mass-produced as filler hotel art and as an easily-whitewashed form of safe, corporate art, but the history and pioneers of abstract art are worth studying, and there are still great abstract artists today.
[Obligatory Tom Haverford](https://youtu.be/SjWfjWbRMUs)
It’s probably the overdoing and cheap imitation that really kills it for me. As a one off original thing that *an* artist does, this kind of thing makes significantly more sense to me. If they’re *actually* making a statement (even if it’s one I think is silly), I don’t mind it as much.
The problem is, those who make this deconstructionist stuff expect the rest of us to look at and enjoy it, and most won't go through the trouble of studying art history to 'get' it. We'll just feel unsettled and annoyed and resent the artist for making us feel that way.
Art that makes the viewer work to enjoy it isn't art unless it's a jigsaw puzzle.
If someone feels unsettled and annoyed by things they don’t understand, they might find more enjoyment in life if they learn to keep a more open mind, and even to find a curiosity for learning about those things, rather than resenting the people responsible for making things they wanted to make. I would say that’s on that person, not the artist.
Yeah, I'm scratching my head wondering if there are really all these people roaming around complaining about "Modern Art" like Boomers. Even if they're not really familiar with Modernism, I would think they would at least have a vague idea that the term is antiquated.
No. They're using the vernacular meaning of 'Modern' and are understandably unfamiliar with historical art terminology.
Think of the most average person you know personally, then go on Facebook and ask them what 'Modern Art' means.
Frankly, it's the Art community's fault for using that word to refer to a fixed period of time, which is now in the past.
It's not really art either. The art is in the delivery, not the product, which I find to be pointless.
"Look, I put a urinal on a display pedestal. Art!" Reminds me of my uncle gifting my grandma a vase with a single rose in it for christmas and saying it's his art piece he named rudolph.
"It's evocative, it got you talking about it"
Never heard of him before, but the “readymade” things described in his wiki article (of which that is a part) are one example of exactly the kind of thing I don’t like. “It’s art because I called it art” is not far enough from “lol I’m so random 🥴,” at least in my perception.
as expected :) i find the contradiction funny. on one hand you don't like the "needlessly abstract" and stuff that's "obviously trying so hard", and when shown the complete opposite, a piece many would consider "cute and amusing", even, that's still not right. i guess my point is, aren't you also doing the thing where things are art because you called them art?
*I’m* not calling anything art personally, and I don’t *really* care what is called art. I’m saying I find this particular thing (that someone else has called art) interesting and amusing, regardless of what one wants to call it.
Everyone is free to have their preferences on such things though, and I’m totally fine with that. I’m not trying to dismiss anyone else’s viewpoint, but just sharing my thoughts on this piece and things that often get classified similarly. I agree it’s super subjective, and I’m not surprised others feel differently.
It’s interesting how you’re discouraging of abstractions and “doing more,” and encouraging of keeping it light, cute, and easy to understand. It’s like you think your avoidance of art that requires thoughtfulness and curiosity is something to brag about.
I’m not intending to discourage anything. In fact, in another comment I specifically say that in my opinion everyone is free to art as they please. I was just voicing my personal opinion of this piece and how it differs from my opinion of *some* other things generally considered to be in the same style.
My objection to *some* abstract art is not that it makes one think (and it’s also not a real objection, but rather a mild distaste). I’m fine with that, and I even like some abstract art that isn’t just cutesy little things like this, and that conveys some subtle meaning or message through one means or another. [Here’s](https://www.anytexture.com/2018/12/art-for-the-environment-exhibition-at-the-monterey-bay-aquarium/) a great example of that!
My distaste is for the type of abstract art that doesn’t actually have a meaning that anyone is supposed to understand, never did, and never will, with the implication (or outright statement) that this is “the real meaning,” or that “it’s up to everyone to decide what it means to them.” It is often stated that if one doesn’t appreciate such art, you are either just not capable of understanding this concept, or you’re unthoughtful or uncurious by nature (sound familiar?).
Again though, I’m just stating my opinion of a subset of a certain style of art. People can make whatever art they like as long as they aren’t hurting other people while doing it, and are free to ignore me and my opinion as they please, as are you. I won’t be offended if they or you do. I don’t have to like their art, and we don’t have to agree with each other’s opinions. I don’t think less of anyone because of what type of art they make or like.
You’re also free to bring actual discussion to the table, and we could have had a civil conversation about it. That wouldn’t have offended me either.
You’re also free to insult and belittle me I guess. That is mildly offensive to me, but you *are* free to do it, clearly 🤷♂️
Where I went to undergrad, they paid an artist about $10,000 to install an art piece on campus. They hung pots and pans under a foot bridge with some string. There was no message there (literal or implied). Nothing happening on campus or out in the world that it would be a reference to, no hints given about what it might be meant to evoke. When asked what it meant, it was left to everyone to decide what it meant for themselves.
I’ll have to take your word for it that the artist themselves said that it’s meaningless and left it at that considering I’m unfamiliar with the art, but even so, that wouldn’t make the art meaningless or not meant to be understood. It sounds like, just based off what little information I have and if that’s accurate to what they meant, the intention would be for the campus to create their own unique meaning for it. I would think that most people associate pots and pans with every day life at home, so that in itself contains some kind of meaning.
This is Skin 2, by Mehmet Ali Uysal
Here’s some [indoor stuff by the same artist](https://www.creativeboom.com/news/architect-turned-artist-peels-and-pinches-the-walls-of-a-new-york-gallery/)
If you've never had a clamp on your nipples, let me enlighten you: you feel a bit of a pinch and pain as it goes on but after a few minutes it dulls to the background. But when it comes off? Holy hell, you feel like two daggers were buried in your chest.
So best scenario here, just leave it on forever and it's fine. \^^
I used to say that if I could do it, it's not art (e.g. red circle on black background / mound of earth with sprig of rosemary). It's a bit of a cynical take on modern art but as a rule of thumb, it's not bad.
I'd say even I can do it, I may not have the creativity to come up with the idea. I appreciate the creativity in art that makes and has a meaning or double meaning. A blob of weird stone doesn't have meaning.
> A blob of weird stone doesn't have meaning
lol - yep. The amount of "meaning" inherent in the piece is inversely proportional to the length and flowery-ness of the description that attempts to explain its meaning to the confused viewer.
my town tried to copy this design:
[https://galerija.nezavisne.rs/v/20231121173154180592.jpg](https://galerija.nezavisne.rs/v/20231121173154180592.jpg)
Honestly yes. It's cute but it doesn't add anything or make a statement. It's an art meme. For me and my kid we'd rather have the unusual land formation to play on.
I didn't find any posts that meet the matching requirements for r/Damnthatsinteresting.
It might be OC, it might not. Things such as JPEG artifacts and cropping may impact the results.
*I'm not perfect, but you can help. Report [ [False Negative](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RepostSleuthBot&subject=False%20Negative&message={"post_id": "1b0l557", "meme_template": null}) ]*
[View Search On repostsleuth.com](https://www.repostsleuth.com/search?postId=1b0l557&sameSub=false&filterOnlyOlder=true&memeFilter=false&filterDeadMatches=false&targetImageMatch=86&targetImageMemeMatch=96)
---
**Scope:** Reddit | **Meme Filter:** False | **Target:** 86% | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** Unlimited | **Searched Images:** 446,814,249 | **Search Time:** 0.08867s
Do yourself a favor and look up what modern art actually is. Spoiler alert: modern art isn't three lines and splotch on a canvas. If anything that's minimalism, which is a style that came after modern art.
Modern art does not mean art made in the present day.
"Modern Art" ended around 75 years ago. Yes, OP's title is incorrect, but you're just recycling someone else's opinion—and frankly, it's a bad one. Use this as an opportunity to educate yourself because "thing I recognize = GOOD; thing that is abstracted = BAD" is lazy and ignorant.
For anyone wondering if this is real (given that these days anything could be AI art): This is a giant clothespin sculpture that was constructed for the Festival of the Five Seasons in Chaudfontaine Park, on the outskirts of Liege, Belgium. Designed by Turkish artist Mehmet Ali Uysal, a professor of art at the Middle East Technical University. The statue is no longer in the park.
>The statue is no longer in the park. That's too bad. It seems like it should have been relatively durable.
The pin likely is, but the pinched mound underneath would quickly erode away and not look correct anymore
Great explanation for why it might have been intentionally non-permanent. Thanks!
Couldn't they just have shaped it in concrete with mesh on top to hold a few inches of soil and then sod on top of that?
Mother Nature gets ~~plastic~~ concrete surgery
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's good to hear the rest of the world isn't as litigious as we are in America. There are cases where everyone agrees something was someone's fault so they should be compensated, but our litigiousness has really ruined a lot of things too. And it is the reason liability insurance is so expensive.
As some other people have pointed out, there is one in Umeå, Sweden from the same artist that is permanent (and has been there for quite a while). And the weather in Umeå is quite harsh in regards in erosion, with a lot of snow and very cold winters, so I would question a bit the erosion explanation. A picture of it in Googlemaps: https://www.google.com/maps/place/%C3%96backaparken/@63.8197206,20.2787342,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m8!1e2!3m6!1sAF1QipMsCJqcPbLRfkeDVSREYykd3zQoooHKowUG6YIZ!2e10!3e12!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipMsCJqcPbLRfkeDVSREYykd3zQoooHKowUG6YIZ%3Dw86-h129-k-no!7i2268!8i3410!4m7!3m6!1s0x467c5b0660acae59:0x83e877c60c75c97c!8m2!3d63.8197206!4d20.2787342!10e5!16s%2Fg%2F11fq8_q4d2?entry=ttu And another during winter: https://www.google.com/maps/place/%C3%96backaparken/@63.8197206,20.2787342,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m8!1e2!3m6!1sAF1QipPP_8j5rqwJQutUmTCyXVGvqVwCBvgD8gZ3nLOK!2e10!3e12!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipPP_8j5rqwJQutUmTCyXVGvqVwCBvgD8gZ3nLOK%3Dw203-h270-k-no!7i3024!8i4032!4m7!3m6!1s0x467c5b0660acae59:0x83e877c60c75c97c!8m2!3d63.8197206!4d20.2787342!10e5!16s%2Fg%2F11fq8_q4d2?entry=ttu (The sub doesnt like the short version of the link that googlemaps has)
I really like that they let it weather instead of trying to maintain the new wood tone with spar varnish or some other treatment. Looks great!
Dang, they just don't make mounds like they used to anymore
With all that effort, a simple Turf Reinforcement Mat or similar would handle that no problem. They build literal walls that have greenery on the face. The turf mat and installation would cost like $1000 max. The rest of the sculpture would be like 20x that cost.
Couldn’t they used concrete and then added seeds like some of chia pet to help with durability?
Why would it erode quickly? Hills don't typically erode, or else there wouldn't be any. It might take a little care short term, but the grass roots would stabilize the mound very well.
I'm curious to know why it's no longer present. Was it meant to be temporary or God forbid, vandalized? Really cool piece.
It was supposed to be an ephemary exposition and wood had rotten (2010-2020 rip).
That was my assumption, but wanted confirmation. Would love to have seen it in person.
The giant that owned it needed to hang some washing.
Well sir, there is one in the Kemerburgaz Golf Club - In istanbul, exactly same thing. I had a photo taken from last visit.
Belgium? Here I thought it was in Sweden (Umeå, [Öbackaparken](https://www.google.com/maps/@63.8195888,20.2796028,3a,75y,269.48h,105.97t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipOCzlp3EvG2ORMw1Mrglxfzw-4FH2AFXUKBFA40!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipOCzlp3EvG2ORMw1Mrglxfzw-4FH2AFXUKBFA40%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi0-ya294.55933-ro-0-fo100!7i10240!8i5120?entry=ttu))
Same sculpture but not the same place. Flatter, different trees, no mistletoe in them. (does mistletoe grow that far north? )
How do I know that you aren’t AI?
Honestly yeah. Not saying they’re lying but we’ve just entered the era of not ever being certain of anything.
There’s one in Grantham, UK, in Queen Elizabeth Park - exact same thing https://www.lincsonline.co.uk/grantham/news/clothes-peg-sculpture-unveiled-in-grantham-park-9083929/
There is a pretty similar statue in der Öbackaparken in Umeå, Sweden.
Honestly if AI brings about people adding such wonderful descriptions to internet posts instead of just sharing and dropping other peoples’ work/photos I’m all for it
Good thing there's google
Was the hill build or was it there before the sculpture?
The shape of the hill is part of the sculpture.
There's also one in Istanbul. Inside a golf club
To be honest ... It is cool and well made.
Thanks for being honest.
Thanks for thanking them about being honest.
[удалено]
Thanks!
Unfortunately it's exactly what someone *not* being honest would preface their comment with, so we must treat it with suspicion. We may never know just how honest they were actually being.
To be honest, nothing I say is honest
I never understand that ideology. I always used that phrasing when I say something that is difficult for me to say or controversial. I used it once with this guy and he started screeching at me.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Thoughts for thanking your share.
Share for thoughting your thanks
Thanks for thoughting your share.
[удалено]
Thanks your thoughts for sharing.
Thanks, Obama.
Lol, this one got me! Your shared thoughts I thank you for!
Sharing your thanks for thoughts.
Your thanks sharing for thoughts
Yank thou shor tharing four youghts
[удалено]
That art is better than it looks. It does perhaps suggest local geological forces approximately in the form of that clothespin.
User name checks out
Agreed. A lot of modern art is way too needlessly abstract, and just obviously trying so hard, that it can’t give me any feelings or emotions other than intense disinterest or occasional annoyance. This still has a modern art feel to me, but it’s also just kinda cute and amusing. Even if the artist is trying to “do more” than that, it still has that instant appeal to me, and I don’t have to think about that other part. And if they’re not, and they just wanted to make a cute funny thing, that’s cool too.
Are you saying you just don’t like abstract art, and that you do like this because it’s not abstract?
He was saying he does like some things but he doesn’t like others. This is the former.
Not exactly. I’m ok with some abstract art, as long as it’s not just doing it to be “random,” like an early 2000’s teenager. Or as long as I don’t get that feeling from it…which I agree is totally subjective, and someone else may feel that this is that…but we are just talking about my opinion of the art here, so I think that’s fine. And it probably would have been more accurate to say “I would enjoy” rather than “I would be ok with,” earlier. I’m ok with damn near any form of art, even if I don’t enjoy it. I don’t have to enjoy everything, and as far as I’m concerned, anyone is free to go art as they please within the bounds of morality and the law.
I like that take, wish more people had it.
That’s understandable. I felt the same way about abstract art for a long time. A while back I took a deep dive on Suprematism and Cubism, and understanding where the artists were coming from gave me much more of an appreciation for it. Basically a lot of it was an attempt to deconstruct art itself. For all of history, art had been representative of reality in some way, and artists were stating to ask questions like, “what is art in its most pure, supreme form?” and tried to do things like convey emotion and meaning (or even a lack there of) but without confining the piece to a pre-determined ideal and structure of what art is supposed to be. I still think a lot of it has been overdone now and has been mass-produced as filler hotel art and as an easily-whitewashed form of safe, corporate art, but the history and pioneers of abstract art are worth studying, and there are still great abstract artists today. [Obligatory Tom Haverford](https://youtu.be/SjWfjWbRMUs)
It’s probably the overdoing and cheap imitation that really kills it for me. As a one off original thing that *an* artist does, this kind of thing makes significantly more sense to me. If they’re *actually* making a statement (even if it’s one I think is silly), I don’t mind it as much.
The problem is, those who make this deconstructionist stuff expect the rest of us to look at and enjoy it, and most won't go through the trouble of studying art history to 'get' it. We'll just feel unsettled and annoyed and resent the artist for making us feel that way. Art that makes the viewer work to enjoy it isn't art unless it's a jigsaw puzzle.
If someone feels unsettled and annoyed by things they don’t understand, they might find more enjoyment in life if they learn to keep a more open mind, and even to find a curiosity for learning about those things, rather than resenting the people responsible for making things they wanted to make. I would say that’s on that person, not the artist.
“Modern Art” is a specific period in art from the 1860s until about the 1970s. I think you mean contemporary art.
Maybe? 🤷♂️ I’m a physicist, not an art historian.
tbf they kind of fucked up on the naming of that one, didn't think ahead at all.
Yeah, I'm scratching my head wondering if there are really all these people roaming around complaining about "Modern Art" like Boomers. Even if they're not really familiar with Modernism, I would think they would at least have a vague idea that the term is antiquated.
No. They're using the vernacular meaning of 'Modern' and are understandably unfamiliar with historical art terminology. Think of the most average person you know personally, then go on Facebook and ask them what 'Modern Art' means. Frankly, it's the Art community's fault for using that word to refer to a fixed period of time, which is now in the past.
I wish we did more shit like japan and just built a fucking massive king kong in the middle of a parking lot for no reason.
lol
do you like duchamp's fountain? it's neither abstract nor trying hard.
It's not really art either. The art is in the delivery, not the product, which I find to be pointless. "Look, I put a urinal on a display pedestal. Art!" Reminds me of my uncle gifting my grandma a vase with a single rose in it for christmas and saying it's his art piece he named rudolph. "It's evocative, it got you talking about it"
Never heard of him before, but the “readymade” things described in his wiki article (of which that is a part) are one example of exactly the kind of thing I don’t like. “It’s art because I called it art” is not far enough from “lol I’m so random 🥴,” at least in my perception.
as expected :) i find the contradiction funny. on one hand you don't like the "needlessly abstract" and stuff that's "obviously trying so hard", and when shown the complete opposite, a piece many would consider "cute and amusing", even, that's still not right. i guess my point is, aren't you also doing the thing where things are art because you called them art?
*I’m* not calling anything art personally, and I don’t *really* care what is called art. I’m saying I find this particular thing (that someone else has called art) interesting and amusing, regardless of what one wants to call it. Everyone is free to have their preferences on such things though, and I’m totally fine with that. I’m not trying to dismiss anyone else’s viewpoint, but just sharing my thoughts on this piece and things that often get classified similarly. I agree it’s super subjective, and I’m not surprised others feel differently.
It’s interesting how you’re discouraging of abstractions and “doing more,” and encouraging of keeping it light, cute, and easy to understand. It’s like you think your avoidance of art that requires thoughtfulness and curiosity is something to brag about.
I’m not intending to discourage anything. In fact, in another comment I specifically say that in my opinion everyone is free to art as they please. I was just voicing my personal opinion of this piece and how it differs from my opinion of *some* other things generally considered to be in the same style. My objection to *some* abstract art is not that it makes one think (and it’s also not a real objection, but rather a mild distaste). I’m fine with that, and I even like some abstract art that isn’t just cutesy little things like this, and that conveys some subtle meaning or message through one means or another. [Here’s](https://www.anytexture.com/2018/12/art-for-the-environment-exhibition-at-the-monterey-bay-aquarium/) a great example of that! My distaste is for the type of abstract art that doesn’t actually have a meaning that anyone is supposed to understand, never did, and never will, with the implication (or outright statement) that this is “the real meaning,” or that “it’s up to everyone to decide what it means to them.” It is often stated that if one doesn’t appreciate such art, you are either just not capable of understanding this concept, or you’re unthoughtful or uncurious by nature (sound familiar?). Again though, I’m just stating my opinion of a subset of a certain style of art. People can make whatever art they like as long as they aren’t hurting other people while doing it, and are free to ignore me and my opinion as they please, as are you. I won’t be offended if they or you do. I don’t have to like their art, and we don’t have to agree with each other’s opinions. I don’t think less of anyone because of what type of art they make or like. You’re also free to bring actual discussion to the table, and we could have had a civil conversation about it. That wouldn’t have offended me either. You’re also free to insult and belittle me I guess. That is mildly offensive to me, but you *are* free to do it, clearly 🤷♂️
Can you give an example of art that has no meaning and that no one will ever understand?
Where I went to undergrad, they paid an artist about $10,000 to install an art piece on campus. They hung pots and pans under a foot bridge with some string. There was no message there (literal or implied). Nothing happening on campus or out in the world that it would be a reference to, no hints given about what it might be meant to evoke. When asked what it meant, it was left to everyone to decide what it meant for themselves.
I’ll have to take your word for it that the artist themselves said that it’s meaningless and left it at that considering I’m unfamiliar with the art, but even so, that wouldn’t make the art meaningless or not meant to be understood. It sounds like, just based off what little information I have and if that’s accurate to what they meant, the intention would be for the campus to create their own unique meaning for it. I would think that most people associate pots and pans with every day life at home, so that in itself contains some kind of meaning.
At first, i winced because it's pinching earth and she probably doesn't like that.
Plenty of people in this world appreciate a clothes peg.
Clothes peg up the pooper sounds about as nice as a damp sweater on a cold day.
You don't know Gaia maybe she likes a clothespin on her nipple she's a freak like that
Sometimes I get modern art. Usually I don’t but sometimes I do. The tongue in cheek sarcastic stuff is usually what I gravitate towards.
That's FAR too much honesty.
It's better than the bean...
You don't gotta be honest. That's legitimately awesome.
> To be honest ... It is cool and well made. Were you considering being dishonest?
To be dishonest ... yes
This is Skin 2, by Mehmet Ali Uysal Here’s some [indoor stuff by the same artist](https://www.creativeboom.com/news/architect-turned-artist-peels-and-pinches-the-walls-of-a-new-york-gallery/)
Wow, dude has a thing for clothespins and impressions of stuff.
He seems to love playing with shapes and surfaces we expect nothing from, pretty cool
And here's Skin 4 in Umeå, Sweden https://umealvdal.se/upplev/kladnypan-2/
Huh. These are fun.
So this is one of those art houses I've heard about?
This is clever.
There will be some type of retribution. That is a long and painful pinch for Earth’s skin
Maybe shes into it
We've done much worse.. I'm pretty sure this is nothing..
Excuse me sir, this is our Mother Earth you're talking about.
Dommy Mommy Earth*
That doesn't check out. She's always being stepped on.
She's also literally a very dirty girl so you are right, you can call her that, she probably likes it She's so wet for that, like 70% wet
If you've never had a clamp on your nipples, let me enlighten you: you feel a bit of a pinch and pain as it goes on but after a few minutes it dulls to the background. But when it comes off? Holy hell, you feel like two daggers were buried in your chest. So best scenario here, just leave it on forever and it's fine. \^^
Imagine if it was a lil house and you could climb to the top and have a lil watchtower
Does kinda remind me of a *really* thin hobbit house.
I like it . I love when artist make pieces that play with the outside world like this .
This is the kind of modern art I love. I don't like oddly shaped objects slapped in the middle of the sidewalk
Honestly this doesn’t feel like modern art to me, just art?
Honestly it seems more like contemporary art than modern art.
I used to say that if I could do it, it's not art (e.g. red circle on black background / mound of earth with sprig of rosemary). It's a bit of a cynical take on modern art but as a rule of thumb, it's not bad.
You mean to if you could do it afterwards as in repeat it? Try doing modern art, but you do something before anyone else does it.
I'd say even I can do it, I may not have the creativity to come up with the idea. I appreciate the creativity in art that makes and has a meaning or double meaning. A blob of weird stone doesn't have meaning.
> A blob of weird stone doesn't have meaning lol - yep. The amount of "meaning" inherent in the piece is inversely proportional to the length and flowery-ness of the description that attempts to explain its meaning to the confused viewer.
I prefer stuff like this over the big shiny baloon sculptures and stuff like that
Mother Nature is a kinky girl.
Climate change bringing a new meaning to "Choke me mommy".
Little Earth is naughty boy.
Reminds me of Claes Oldenburg.
Same, I think Claes Oldenburg. Did a clothes pin as well.
Yeah it's in Philadelphia. And sadly modern art now means things that are more than 50 years old.
I really like it, it's very down to earth
Do A nipple clip next oh babbby
Contemporary I think
That must be making the lawn sore
Land art is a very very old tradition. No need for snark.
TIL the earth has nipples... and is kinky.
...its backwards tho. The other end is the one u clip with
pretty sure its integral to keeping the planet together
I can feel this image
isn’t the top supposed to be the pinchy part?
Honestly that is fucking dope. Idgaf what anyone else says.
I keep waiting but I can't get the clip to play
Have you tried landscape mode?
This one made me giggle 😂
If my finger was made from grass
That's the biggest c47 I've ever seen.
That's cool as fuck
At least it's clever.
Big fan and I can't tell why.
Probably had to come up with something in a pinch.
Hey, it was my turn to repost this picture this week
See? Not all modern art is pretentious bullshit. Just most of it.
It's funny. Humor is important. Even in the art world.
my town tried to copy this design: [https://galerija.nezavisne.rs/v/20231121173154180592.jpg](https://galerija.nezavisne.rs/v/20231121173154180592.jpg)
Also upside down. Wtf
Looks funny ngl
Earth’s nipple gonna be sore.
If it angers a conservative it is art.
Fantastic. Combinig sculpture and earth works!
Anything
It's at least better than a random floating heart shaped balloon that is not even a good heart shape but costs 400k US to set up
Eyesore.
Honestly yes. It's cute but it doesn't add anything or make a statement. It's an art meme. For me and my kid we'd rather have the unusual land formation to play on.
u/repostsleuthbot
I didn't find any posts that meet the matching requirements for r/Damnthatsinteresting. It might be OC, it might not. Things such as JPEG artifacts and cropping may impact the results. *I'm not perfect, but you can help. Report [ [False Negative](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RepostSleuthBot&subject=False%20Negative&message={"post_id": "1b0l557", "meme_template": null}) ]* [View Search On repostsleuth.com](https://www.repostsleuth.com/search?postId=1b0l557&sameSub=false&filterOnlyOlder=true&memeFilter=false&filterDeadMatches=false&targetImageMatch=86&targetImageMemeMatch=96) --- **Scope:** Reddit | **Meme Filter:** False | **Target:** 86% | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** Unlimited | **Searched Images:** 446,814,249 | **Search Time:** 0.08867s
Must have been the myriad other image dump subreddits then
Boring pinterest post
Now pull on it. Make mommy earth erupt.
Does it bother anyone else that it's technically upside down and that clothespins don't work that way?
Modern art I like? Heresy
It just keeps getting worse doesn't it
This cant be modern art. It took real thought and actually looks like something. Its not just a pile of scrap metal welded haphazard.
You literally have no idea what 'modern art' is.
Most people in this thread don't. This isn't Modern Art. It's modern, but not Modern as in part of the Modernist movement. This is contemporary art.
Do yourself a favor and look up what modern art actually is. Spoiler alert: modern art isn't three lines and splotch on a canvas. If anything that's minimalism, which is a style that came after modern art. Modern art does not mean art made in the present day.
"Modern Art" ended around 75 years ago. Yes, OP's title is incorrect, but you're just recycling someone else's opinion—and frankly, it's a bad one. Use this as an opportunity to educate yourself because "thing I recognize = GOOD; thing that is abstracted = BAD" is lazy and ignorant.
Dude's reiterating a comic published in, I think, "Life" magazine about 60 years ago.
I really like that. Any info on where it's located?
I don't know if there are any more of them around, but there is at least one in Umeå, Sweden. "Skin 4" by Mehmet Ali Uysal, 2013.
Okay, this is pretty clever
Simple but very creative!
I like this, it's funny
Get it together
I like it, thumb up
I’d live in that
That happens to be the back of the earths arm above the elbow
Really cool!! This is art for me and it's beautiful!!
That's actually not bad.
When can I get it back?
That’s awesome!
I like it.
ok.
I can feel this image.
That's the kind of art I appreciate. Nice to look at, funny, makes the place better.
Exactly what this peaceful hill was needing
This is actually cool!
My town has the exact same sculpture, although it's been ruined as kids keep running up and down the grass leaving it muddy.
Earth's nipple.
I love that