I feel like I am the wrong person to critique this movement. Since it seems it is my views in particular it appears to be demeaning. Anyway, I would view this as just another way to gatekeep what is and what is not are by creating borders. (high-brow, low-brow, art music, popular music) It is just another reponse to the dizziness our century's flush of modernity. And, on the side note, if they are really that perturbed by the presence of "Hamparte" art then they should really analyze the society they are currently living in. Since only this version of possible society can come up with specific talentless art. It might make them want to change it.
thanks for answering, i would like to open a debate about this subject because of the themes it engulfs. For what i understand the message was about critiquing oversaturation of trends by a group of people who deny other kinds of art as "commercial" and therefore "less art" who have positions like "there is no space for portraits on art with the invention of the camera" but claiming something is art only because they made it and gave it profound a "meaning" using as examples yoko ono and the half full glass of this kind of work. Also they are critiquing that this "high concept art" is being pushed by demeaning other art forms as "comercial without personality" by their proponents with frases like "manga isnt art"to give an example, it isnt on the video but i have heard it from the movement that they are tired of hearing the ppl they are critiquing saying things like that and hearing what is art and isnt by people who they think that if none had heard of them their work would not had being recognized as art by itself(basically that is more recognized for being put by a celebrity than because the work can impact by itself).
it is hard to see in the dark when your eyes are blinded by the light
Oh and someone who was in favor of this movement showed a video on another forum i frequent as an example of the kind of attitudes they want to overthrow on the arts field (the teachers stance) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdbjzs2_1rY
Watching these videos, I can see why someone would support this movement. It supposedly calls out the hucksters and fraudulent artists exiting today. But from what I am understanding it seems a bit contradictory. Specifically, calling them out for rejecting commercial art, yet also never actually considering it real art (within the ethics of Hamparte I mean, not the artist shown in second the video). And the seeming negligence of of political or anti-art. As "great artists" such as Picasso, Duchamp or Malevich engaged in it routinely.
Edited by KeironCioran on Dec 15th 2018 at 7:12:56 AM
I think Villaran(the guy who started the movement) said something like this about Duchamp "With Dadaism the message of Duchamp was misinterpreted by Hampartists and this has been used by people, galleries and the great fortunes for more and more money" or something like that using a particularly known example of how modern artist were found on money washing(?)(sorry english isnt my first language, not even my second) on an interview he did, i dont remember where but it appeared on 15Minutos, this spreaded really fast i wouldnt had know about it didnt appeared on the news of my country(and it seem it appeared on the news outlets of many countries because he is spaniard and we dont usually get news from there on this subject).
Edited by willofone on Dec 15th 2018 at 7:41:44 AM
it is hard to see in the dark when your eyes are blinded by the light
I found some of the precepts of the manifesto, i will try to translate the best i can: "An art piece could be Hamparte if/is:
1.Object manufactured in series that anyone can find in a store and that are presented as a work of art.
2. Put object that isnt considered art anywhere else in an exhibition space and call it a work of art.
3.If the work does not require much talent to do it, it could be found on any common place and not be called art on those places.
4.If its only value is sustained by a theoretical, speculative and political text that is not reflected in the work.
5.The attribution of nonexistent value to common objects that are marketed with exorbitant prices when you could found the same on a common shop.
An artist must always demonstrate that he is an artist, he never earns the right to be an artist(i think he is saying that the artist isnt the one who makes his work art but his work that mades him an artist). Otherwise, it is hamparte."
i made what i could Castellan has many idiosincrasies that cant be well translated to english.
Edited by willofone on Dec 15th 2018 at 7:55:14 AM
it is hard to see in the dark when your eyes are blinded by the light
There has be quite the ruckus during these last 2 years on the art discussions on the hispanic world about the criticism of the modern art and how art has become "lazy", "dull" and "nepotistic", that made a proffesor of arts to create the term "hamparte"("trash art" o "fake art") to denounce what he sees as the loss of the love to art to a sense of egolatry trough the use of the True Art Is Incomprehensible stances. My questions to this forum is ¿what do you think of the term? ¿has vadility?¿do you think that modern art is in problems and there is almost no "real art" left on art galleries?
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=HAMPARTE
Edited by willofone on Dec 3rd 2018 at 8:11:47 AM
it is hard to see in the dark when your eyes are blinded by the light