I don't really know how to introduce this

[tooblue]

Tooblue, I say this with love, but you're an f-ing idiot

Am I? Good to know. But, what is art?

[tooblue]

The McNaughton piece is clearly idiotic and offensive (indicting college professors, the media, etc. as unChristian and painting the Deist Founding Fathers as Christian right-wingers). No intelligent person could ever think that painting made any sense, and yes that generalization is appropriate here.

What you posted is just a basic "public service message" against homophobia.

Yeah, there is a big difference. You really think they are equivalent?

It's not about whether his art makes sense to you or me. However, the derision here is incredibly ironic. Are you aware of the artist who created that first "public service message" as you call it?

They are equivalent because they are both art and controversial ... look at how much vitriol McNaughton's work has created ... how much publicity ... lol

[TripletDaddy]

is there a difference between Mcnaughton's art and, say, this piece:

http://www.betweenbridges.net/Wojnarowicz_card.jpg

One is a painting and the other looks like some sort of ad. Is that the sort of thing you were looking for?

[tooblue]

One is a painting and the other looks like some sort of ad. Is that the sort of thing you were looking for?

Look up: David Wojnarowicz (nsfw)

Is Mr. Mcnaughton on par with Mr. Wojnarowicz in terms of significance. Not likely. Is his earnestness on par. Most certainly.

[TripletDaddy]

Look up: David Wojnarowicz (nsfw)

Is Mr. Mcnaughton on par with Mr. Wojnarowicz in terms of significance. Not likely. Is his earnestness on par. Most certainly.

I'm not entirely sure anyone disagrees with you. From what I gather and recall about this thread, the criticism centered on the over the top and often ridiculous religious stereotyping portrayed in the painting. I think few doubted his earnestness or belief in what he was doing. I think this guy definitely believes what he is painting and really considers it a bit of Gods work.

It truly is a ridiculous piece and while I find that moose painting you linked to be silly in its own right, the moose painting is not intended to convey a religious and political message and therefore would likely be held to less scrutiny, if any.

You are one of the few on this board that actually has any legitimate bona fides in this field. All kidding aside, what do you think of the painting, esp the explanatory detail provided as you scroll over the various figures? You tend to lean conservatively (absolutely nothing wrong with that) and you also appreciate and understand art from a technical perspective. What is your take?

[tooblue]

I'm not entirely sure anyone disagrees with you. From what I gather and recall about this thread, the criticism centered on the over the top and often ridiculous religious stereotyping portrayed in the painting. I think few doubted his earnestness or belief in what he was doing. I think this guy definitely believes what he is painting and really considers it a bit of Gods work.

It truly is a ridiculous piece and while I find that moose painting you linked to be silly in its own right, the moose painting is not intended to convey a religious and political message and therefore would likely be held to less scrutiny, if any.

You are one of the few on this board that actually has any legitimate bona fides in this field. All kidding aside, what do you think of the painting, esp the explanatory detail provided as you scroll over the various figures? You tend to lean conservatively (absolutely nothing wrong with that) and you also appreciate and understand art from a technical perspective. What is your take?

I find the McNaughton piece no more ridiculous than the piece by Wojnarowicz, of which multiple prints hang in multiple museums, least of all the MOMA.

Both pieces are more significant than the Moose painting by Robert Bateman. The interesting thing to me, I'm willing to bet, is that many posters here have a Bateman, or something similar in terms of significance, hanging in their home—especially those individuals who have been highly derisive of McNaughton.

Technically speaking, the McNaughton painting demonstrates wonderful craftsmanship. The ideas behind the piece, or ideas that motivated it's creation, are a sincere honest attempt to convey his ideology. I can respect that.

Do I agree with his ideology? No. Would I buy a print of his work and hang in my home? No. Regardless, I'm not going to deride him for those ideas, no more than I would attempt to deride Wojnarowicz for his art and ideology. However, I do find each respective artists earnestness compelling.

[UtahDan]

I find the McNaughton piece no more ridiculous than the piece by Wojnarowicz, of which multiple prints hang in multiple museums, least of all the MOMA.

Both pieces are more significant than the Moose painting by Robert Bateman. The interesting thing to me, I'm willing to bet, is that many posters here have a Bateman, or something similar in terms of significance, hanging in their home—especially those individuals who have been highly derisive of McNaughton.

Technically speaking, the McNaughton painting demonstrates wonderful craftsmanship. The ideas behind the piece, or ideas that motivated it's creation, are a sincere honest attempt to convey his ideology. I can respect that.

Do I agree with his ideology? No. Would I buy a print of his work and hang in my home? No. Regardless, I'm not going to deride him for those ideas, no more than I would attempt to deride Wojnarowicz for his art and ideology. However, I do find each respective artists earnestness compelling.

I don't agree with tb often, but this topic is right in his wheelhouse and I find the above very persuasive.

[TripletDaddy]

I find the McNaughton piece no more ridiculous than the piece by Wojnarowicz, of which multiple prints hang in multiple museums, least of all the MOMA.

Both pieces are more significant than the Moose painting by Robert Bateman. The interesting thing to me, I'm willing to bet, is that many posters here have a Bateman, or something similar in terms of significance, hanging in their home—especially those individuals who have been highly derisive of McNaughton.

Technically speaking, the McNaughton painting demonstrates wonderful craftsmanship. The ideas behind the piece, or ideas that motivated it's creation, are a sincere honest attempt to convey his ideology. I can respect that.

Do I agree with his ideology? No. Would I buy a print of his work and hang in my home? No. Regardless, I'm not going to deride him for those ideas, no more than I would attempt to deride Wojnarowicz for his art and ideology. However, I do find each respective artists earnestness compelling.

Interesting. Thanks too blue

[Jeff Lebowski]

I find the McNaughton piece no more ridiculous than the piece by Wojnarowicz, of which multiple prints hang in multiple museums, least of all the MOMA.

Both pieces are more significant than the Moose painting by Robert Bateman. The interesting thing to me, I'm willing to bet, is that many posters here have a Bateman, or something similar in terms of significance, hanging in their home—especially those individuals who have been highly derisive of McNaughton.

The pieces by McNaughton and Wojnarowicz are more significant due to controversy and underlying political overtones. Yet you imply anyone who has a "less significant" (i.e., less outrageous) piece of art in their home is some kind of chump and is in no position to mock the absurdity in McNaughton's work. Phooey.

Technically speaking, the McNaughton painting demonstrates wonderful craftsmanship. The ideas behind the piece, or ideas that motivated it's creation, are a sincere honest attempt to convey his ideology. I can respect that.

I don't think anyone doubts his sincerity. I don't doubt Glenn Beck's sincerity either. But there are a lot of really sincere idiots in the world. Dime a dozen in fact.

Do I agree with his ideology? No. Would I buy a print of his work and hang in my home? No. Regardless, I'm not going to deride him for those ideas, no more than I would attempt to deride Wojnarowicz for his art and ideology. However, I do find each respective artists earnestness compelling.

So is it wrong to judge art? To have preferences? McNaughton's work has all the subtlety of a sledgehammer. When a piece of art has such an overt message in it, is it wrong to have a conversation or a reaction in response to that message?

[LA Ute]

Tooblue makes some valid points. McNaughton's piece should not provoke any more eye-rolling or derision than "Piss Christ." (Google that if you aren't familiar with the work.) Still, it's disturbing to me (a political conservative) that a significant number of Mormons hold so strongly to views that are so misinformed and so polarizing. To me that's what the painting represents.

[DU Ute]

Tooblue makes some valid points. McNaughton's piece should not provoke any more eye-rolling or derision than "Piss Christ." (Google that if you aren't familiar with the work.) Still, it's disturbing to me (a political conservative) that a significant number of Mormons hold so strongly to views that are so misinformed and so polarizing. To me that's what the painting represents.

This is a good point, this painting represents the same thing to me. I'm also glad you were able to work the word "piss" into your 10,000th post.

[Katy Lied]

I dont believe TB is making a political or cultural or aesthetic statement. I believe he's making an artistic statement.

I dont think you can infer TB's political position from his posts above. I think you can infer his artistic position.

[Moliere]

I find the McNaughton piece no more ridiculous than the piece by Wojnarowicz, of which multiple prints hang in multiple museums, least of all the MOMA.

Both pieces are more significant than the Moose painting by Robert Bateman. The interesting thing to me, I'm willing to bet, is that many posters here have a Bateman, or something similar in terms of significance, hanging in their home—especially those individuals who have been highly derisive of McNaughton.

Technically speaking, the McNaughton painting demonstrates wonderful craftsmanship. The ideas behind the piece, or ideas that motivated it's creation, are a sincere honest attempt to convey his ideology. I can respect that.

Do I agree with his ideology? No. Would I buy a print of his work and hang in my home? No. Regardless, I'm not going to deride him for those ideas, no more than I would attempt to deride Wojnarowicz for his art and ideology. However, I do find each respective artists earnestness compelling.

Sorry TB, you are wrong. This is like saying "You've Got Mail" is a fine piece of art. Mcnaughton's piece is a sappy pile of crap.

[pellegrino]

I always knew pellegrino was a godless communist, but not you too LA!

just a communist, thank you.

[il Padrino Ute]

Sorry TB, you are wrong. This is like saying "You've Got Mail" is a fine piece of art. Mcnaughton's piece is a sappy pile of crap.

How can an opinion be wrong?