George W. Bush Paintings.

[Unkotare]

Irony alert.

Do you still need help?

Obviously not.

You sure? You seemed pretty confused about something but you never did clarify exactly what was giving you trouble.

 

[Muhammed]

Suddenly everyone's an art critic.

You forgot the "if" part.

Dumbass!

 

[Papageorgio]

Absolutely not. That is not true. People who know nothing about true artistic value might think so, but it is not true at all.

You need a pin in your bubble. Art is about commerce. If you can't sell your shit, you are a worthless artist. Rent a storage space. Decorate that.

Real art has nothing to do with money. Money does not equal artistic quality. Think of the many great artists who were not even recognized as great artists until after their deaths. Making a lot of money does not mean one is a great artist anymore than making a lot of money means one is a great man, a great person. Money is not the test of quality in any area. Take actors or writers. Those who are the real artists are generally not those who are making the most money. A box office draw may get a huge salary per picture, but he/she is not generally the best actor. A book that tops the bestseller list may make a lot of money, but is generally, in literary terms, not a very good book, usually junk, in fact.

It's all about opinion, and you opinion counts for one person. What you think is good art may not be good art for myself, it is all opinion and yours is just as equal as mine. And 99.99999% don't care about your or my opinion.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Wow.

These are very good.

George W. Bush paintings: Tony Blair, Vladimir Putin and Angela Merkel feature in new exhibit | Metro News

Yep. This time, Bush actually did it.

 

[Pogo]

Do you still need help?

Obviously not.

You sure? You seemed pretty confused about something but you never did clarify exactly what was giving you trouble.

Considering which one of us is incessantly yapping stupid questions I think the obvious is obvious.

And no, I'm not offering "help" wit dat.

 

[Smilebong]

Hitler was a good artist too.

Oh, please.

 

[dr.d]

Wow.

These are very good.

George W. Bush paintings: Tony Blair, Vladimir Putin and Angela Merkel feature in new exhibit | Metro News

I'm not one for art, as I like things to look like things and people to look like the people.

didn't really like most of what he did, but the one of putin was dead on.

he captured that shark gaze very well. putin is truly evil

Really?...Did W capture the "soul" that he said he saw in Putin's eyes? I guess not this time...actually ...Putin's eyes look like pretty much all of the eyes in the other Pix...dead. W maybe the exception of Barny...


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[TemplarKormac]

An intellectual movement years after his artwork would have even been "en vogue".

Like I said, out of your league.

The 1920s was years after? So you think the Nazis ushered in the Weimar "intellectual" years? You are out of your league posting anything anywhere.

Hitler tried art from 1906-1911. The 1920's was indeed YEARS AFTER THAT. The Weimar Republic happened after that. Even if his stuff, produced mostly in Austria, had made it to Berlin, it would have been reviewed by an entirely different crowd than the one you mention. The problem is with both your logic and your timeline.

I never said that the Nazis ushered in the Weimar Republic. You just love to make stuff up, like a little kid.

Care to try again, like a real adult?

LOL.

Really, Godwin's law shouldn't need to be invoked here. Quite sad that in a light hearted thread such as this one, people feel the need to refer to Bush as Hitler.

 

[Iceweasel]

An intellectual movement years after his artwork would have even been "en vogue".

Like I said, out of your league.

The 1920s was years after? So you think the Nazis ushered in the Weimar "intellectual" years? You are out of your league posting anything anywhere.

Hitler tried art from 1906-1911. The 1920's was indeed YEARS AFTER THAT. The Weimar Republic happened after that. Even if his stuff, produced mostly in Austria, had made it to Berlin, it would have been reviewed by an entirely different crowd than the one you mention. The problem is with both your logic and your timeline.

I never said that the Nazis ushered in the Weimar Republic. You just love to make stuff up, like a little kid.

Care to try again, like a real adult?

What a stupid asshole.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bauhaus#Bauhaus_and_German_modernism

However, the most important influence on Bauhaus was modernism, a cultural movement whose origins lay as far back as the 1880s, and which had already made its presence felt in Germany before the World War, despite the prevailing conservatism.

 

[Unkotare]

Obviously not.

You sure? You seemed pretty confused about something but you never did clarify exactly what was giving you trouble.

Considering which one of us is incessantly yapping stupid questions I think the obvious is obvious.

And no, I'm not offering "help" wit dat.

It seemed you were seeking help. Was that not the case?

 

[Esmeralda]

You need a pin in your bubble. Art is about commerce. If you can't sell your shit, you are a worthless artist. Rent a storage space. Decorate that.

Real art has nothing to do with money. Money does not equal artistic quality. Think of the many great artists who were not even recognized as great artists until after their deaths. Making a lot of money does not mean one is a great artist anymore than making a lot of money means one is a great man, a great person. Money is not the test of quality in any area. Take actors or writers. Those who are the real artists are generally not those who are making the most money. A box office draw may get a huge salary per picture, but he/she is not generally the best actor. A book that tops the bestseller list may make a lot of money, but is generally, in literary terms, not a very good book, usually junk, in fact.

It's all about opinion, and you opinion counts for one person. What you think is good art may not be good art for myself, it is all opinion and yours is just as equal as mine. And 99.99999% don't care about your or my opinion.

As I have stated before, there are qualitative elements in any art that make it good art or bad art. It is not a matter of my opinion, of what I like or don't like. There is good art which I don't like. It has been going on for some generations that Americans have been told and believe that anything can be called art, that art is simply what any individual says. If you say it is art, if you think it is good, if you like it, then it is art. This is not true. There are qualities in good art that make it good art. Anyone who tells you anything different is misinforming you. This is not about my opinion or what I think is good. So called experts may disagree about specific works of art or even specific artists, but, usually, in general, they do agree on good art and bad art.

GW is someone who is dabbling in art. He got a teacher to teach him the qualities of good art and is trying to emulate them; but he has no real talent. That's fine. He's an old man enjoying painting. Leave it at that. It is an insult to real artists to put GW's work above theirs just because he is famous/nortorious. It's really unfair to those who are serious artists. Ironically, those who keep saying that it is all a matter of opinion, what is good and what isn't, also keep going on aboout how Bush got a teacher to teach him: what else do you think the teacher tried to teach him but the qualities of good art? Too funny. You all are not using a lot of logic here. Just accept he is an old guy dabbling in painting, one without any depth or range of talent. It is not aboout politics. Hitler, whose politics no one likes, right or left, was a much better artist than Bush. That's a fact. This is not about politics.

 

[Unkotare]

GW is someone who is dabbling in art. He got a teacher to teach him the qualities of good art and is trying to emulate them; but he has no real talent. .

Would you mind specifying your qualifications in rendering such a judgment?

 

[Esmeralda]

How much do you get paid for Juroring an art show? What are your qualifications as an art Judge?

Zip. Nothing. You have an opinion which is very much like your asshole. No one cares. IF many great artists are recognized as great artists after their death, their art becomes valuable and it is valued, bought and sold like any other item in commerce.

Your mouth is pretty much like your asshole, it spews nothing but shit. And that goes for Samson too. Both back on ignore; i.e., not worth engaging in any type of intelligent discussion.

Early Sunday Morning Meltdown!




Well, I've accomplished my mission for today.

Hardly a meltdown. What a moron you are.

 

[Dot Com]

 

[rdean]

rderp wanted to join in the conversation on this thread so that he could discuss some other topic entirely.

How do you spell my name?

U
n
k
o
t
a
r
e

Oh wait. That's not how you spell my name. That's the name of someone who said a big, ignorant lie. So big in fact. I couldn't let them get away with it. You however......

 

[rdean]

They look like caricatures.

caricatures

Here's the fun thing, deany.

You can't separate your hatred of the man for his talent.

These aren't 'caricatures'.

This is expressionism.

Expressionism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a very talented artist.

Not true. Expressionism is an exaggerated artistic representation usually with an explosion of colors and forms that will create and heighten an emotional response. Look at the pictures on your link.

Now look at Bush's pictures. Every single portrait has the same blank expression as his animal pictures:

The only difference is that he can add enough that you can tell who it represents. But this is not very good art and certainly not "Expressionism". Because there simply isn't enough "expression". Get it? "Expression" and then "Expressionism".

It's hilarious to me that anyone would say these wooden and one dimensional pictures came from a "very talented artist". This is exactly why right wingers don't do "design".
The Crystal Cathedral is considered by many to be the most beautiful Cathedral in the United States. When Christians wanted to build it, they looked for the best and most talented architect. So they got a gay guy. Someone not welcome in the church he designed. Why get a gay guy? Would you really want a right winger to design your church? Or anything for that matter?

 

[Two Thumbs]

Wow.

These are very good.

George W. Bush paintings: Tony Blair, Vladimir Putin and Angela Merkel feature in new exhibit | Metro News

I'm not one for art, as I like things to look like things and people to look like the people.

didn't really like most of what he did, but the one of putin was dead on.

he captured that shark gaze very well. putin is truly evil

Really?...Did W capture the "soul" that he said he saw in Putin's eyes? I guess not this time...actually ...Putin's eyes look like pretty much all of the eyes in the other Pix...dead. W maybe the exception of Barny...


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

your level of dumb is pretty impressive.

 

[Barb]

Not bad. I do see some small cosmetic kindnesses he tried to include. Tony Blair doesn't look nearly so hung over, Angela Merkel got a total face lift, complete with eye lift, Silvio has a much more generous hairline...but the tint was wayyyy off for skin tone and hair color, Vlad looks appropriately dour. Dad looks like he was all puffed up from steroids (not those kind) though.

 

[rdean]

Hey, I just found out why Bush's lame portraits are so bland. He just took the pictures right off Google. He put in Putin's name and the first picture that popped up is the one he painted. Same for the others:

 

[rdean]

That cartoon reminds me of Bush joking about bike riding with one legged young soldiers maimed in Iraq:

I'm riding as hard as I possibly can and I look over my shoulder and there's a one-legged guy barely breathing. . . .

George Bush joins injured veterans on 62-mile bicycle ride

Yea, that guy only has one leg because of you swine. And you laugh and make jokes. Remember "no WMD's under there, or there" as part of a comedy routine? Imagine, finding humor in someone's injuries. Injuries that were your fault. Oh, these Republicans. Where do they find them?