[donjigweed]

I have zero artistic ability. My father is a very accomplished amateur artist. I've got into this discussion with him several times. Rather than Pollock's work, the best exemplar supporting the argument that artistic value is arbitrary is, in my opinion, Rothko's color field paintings [1]. My father explained to me that the reason it's in the Smithsonian is because he did something no one else had ever done before, he reduced the traditional landscape painting to it's absolute minimum. Same thing for Pollock, he did something no one else had ever done before. At least according to a very small clique of New York Jews. (Joking. Kind of. Not being anti-semitic, I'm an atheist Jew.)

Of course, the fact that this guy [2] is not also in the Smithsonian is strong evidence that it is in fact completely arbitrary.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_field [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owSZs7H24UY

[watwut]

Association of Jews with modern art is one of things that really really irritated nazi in Germany. They believed that Jews are intentionally destroying German culture by doing and promoting non traditional art.

But like, while somewhat over represented in Vienna modern circles, they were no majority at any point nor only the ones liking it. Probably not even more likely to like it.

[lonelappde]

But hey, what's a little cultural cringe among friends, to show off one's ignorance of its connection to genocide.