Vincent von Frese 05 Mar 2014

Why is it no one can agree that "ugly"(as per definition) is possible in art? It's a common component of art just as beautiful is in my opinion. There is no reason why an artist cannot decide to make some ugly art in order to make some political or socially intense statement is there?

Perhaps none wish to be known for having judged some art as ugly right? But there is no denying that it is definitely out there and visible either on the street as graffiti or in contemporary art museums where it is intentional.

Vincent von Frese 06 Mar 2014

To Marty;

i agree that to judge an artist by the observation of one work or song is a mistake and that a more holistic approach is necessary to get the gist of who the artist really is.

Technical proficiency alone get an artist only so far because it's that unexplainable magic that makes artist's shine brightly and stand out from others. I think that brightness is not always consistent because many elements must intersect at a special moment to make it happen.

If you were to have a contest on drawing an apple then you would have a wide range of results. Judgement of art is not however an artist's privilege but that of the non-artist I think. So called "experts" are a pain!

Vincent von Frese 08 Mar 2014

YURI:

Thanks for the Army truck pic Yuri. How are things in the Ukraine? I hope something gets resolved for the benefit of all.

What is considered by some to be "ugly" in art and in life is not something we must be too concerned with beyond trivial discussions like this one. As artists we seek beauty and poetic aura and nothing else.

Here's a shot I took on Wednesday of a beach I went diving in on the coast of Ocha Rios in Jamaica.

Vincent von Frese 29 Mar 2014

One thing which might be called ugly about art is the packaging and selling of it in the form of a "brand". which is the current trend. This sucks in my opinion.

Genuine artwork itself is a personal expression and not a product on the market designed for mass sales of reproductions.

Vincent von Frese 02 Apr 2014

Art made for money as the reward is never as rewarding for me as art I have made for quality of my own personal artistic performance.

Lois Penrod 02 Apr 2014

For me as a artist there is a way to succeed in my opinion and yes I realize making money with art is hard to do.

So just by showing your art online is great no selling,unless you think otherwise it is like giving part of yourself away saying judge me,which I do not understand you are putting yourself up for failure you never know who or if anybody would like it.

To critique or to tell someone how good their art is to me different,because you are not such a failure you should believe in yourself anyway and not be let down on how you draw,if you know your good at it yourself,art will always be your passion.

Lois Penrod 03 Apr 2014

It is the persons right to do what they want with their art.I appraise people who are lucky enough to get that far but the failure that evolves around art I do not believe in.Art is fun anybody can do it.Who said a child does not create a good piece,it means something.People are more developed then other people that is just the way it is.

Competition I know makes people stronger,I do not see competition in art in other things I do but art in itself is supposed to make you stronger.

Vincent von Frese 12 May 2014

Louis, Yes, I agree that competition is a strengthener(in anything) including art. When doing one's best by focusing on the task while practicing some discipline is all one needs.

Selling or not selling is important but not as much as getting the work right in my view.

Lydia Craven 20 Sep 2014

Some art is ugly or disturbing to create an emotional effect in the viewer, such as in some surreal paintings. That doesn't make them bad paintings. Rather, it makes them quite effective because they require the viewer to really think about the message the artist was trying to convey. I suppose it depends on the definition of ugly. Ugly can mean sloppy, poorly executed work. It can mean horrifying, dark, and harmful. It can mean disturbing, confusing, and macabre. Macabre art may be "ugly," but it is ugly for a purpose. In fact, ugly probably isn't the right word. Macabre art is ugly in that it looks like something from a bad dream. It brings out strange feelings of fear and confusion that are hard to explain. This type of ugly is certainly effective and powerful in art. These paintings are often hard to understand, which makes them unappealing to some. They certainly aren't the type of paintings one would hang above the fireplace. But they are and effective art form. I've heard it said that art should disturb the comfort and comfort the disturbed. Perhaps that is the purpose of the macabre art that some would consider ugly.

Matt Brynick 06 Jul 2016

This is like the epitome of ugly, and yet it gets so much compliments, and the price is not low, some mixture of techniques, probably made in windows paint in the ugliest colors... do people really have such bad taste? I mean, it's illogical.

http://www.artwanted.com/imageview.cfm?ID=742436&IRV=18

Reply