works of art that you love, and also depress the hell out of you

http://www.hubin.org/images/column_pictures/munch/sjuka_flickan_w480.jpg

(reminds me of being ill as a kid)

Red House Painters first few albums.
Spike Milligan's poetry.

the thin red line

Mark Rothko paintings, also.

OTM.

Me either, unless you count film as visual art, which you should. Static paintings don't often depress me, though. I haven't developed the proper sensibility.

the turn of the screw

(duh)

i think the question is very subjective, because i read "depress the hell out of you" as meaning some kind of art that has the power to make you incredibly sad by its unparalleled/vivid portrayal of something that makes you really sad/emotional in real life. if you know what i mean.

This is exactly my problem with Dancer in the Dark. Diff'rent strokes, I guess.

I read it that way, too, gem. Bad movies make me sad for the fate of humanity in a way, I guess, but nowhere close to what Cries and Whispers does to me. I've seen enough bad movies that to be actually be depressed by them would indicate an inability to deal with life.

I agree actually Eric H, the only redeeming feature I found in that Titanic movie of a few years ago is a scene of an old couple laying together in their bed and waiting to drown, the idea of them tenderly saying goodbye made me very sad!

I know very little about any sort of art so in a sense, one of my only personal barometers of "great" art is whether it can provoke an extreme emotional reaction in me. Depressive is one, but happy or blissful could be another

(it's easier than explaining my objections to this idea)

Well, right. Watching Conan invokes in me an empathy for Conan, which I guess is slightly sad.

I don't really gauge depressive reactions as barometers of great art

Well, of course not! There's plenty of great art that's positively elating! In fact, the majority of it at least aspires to that. Hence the question.

Again you're tacitly negating the reason you post here at all. Here we constantly discuss the undiscussable, and that's the point, and I've noticed you there a lot. If you believe what you just said, maybe you should just move to the noize board, you think?

Wow. Weird. I love that album sooooo much. It makes me soooo happy. I can't even *conceive* of how that record is depressing. Just because it's quiet for the second half? What a bunch of idiots.

I don't understand your point, and your delivery of what I did not understand seemed rather abrasive. Perhaps you could restate the question?

I can only think you guys have just not experienced art.

for me, this is probably true wrt visual art. i get more depressed by this painting of a boy sitting at a desk than by guernica. i can't really explain why and i'm not even sure that i feel this way.

-diction4ry.com

I don't know about a "boy sitting at a desk," but that image does remind me of Wyeth's Christina's World, which is fairly heartbreaking.

OK, so I'm not dropping it. So sue me. Hstencil, there's nothing especially wrong with any particular thing that you say, but you always come on like s stiff prick, and it's tiring. We've been through this before. I know you haven't forgotten my "what *do* you like" schpiel. It takes one to know one, of course, so I'm in a special position to say this, beacuse I *am* one. I've been an asshole often enough to know -- dude, you have a habit of coming off like an asshole. I have only this advice to offer, and you're probably going to hate me for it, but it's late, and I like you but I think you're a habital dick to a lot of people that I like even more than I like you, so here it is:

If you have something additional to say, say it. If you have something funny to say, by all means say it. If you have something constructively critical to say, say it with prudence. But if all you have is a handful of hot shit, please keep it to yourself.

Well, and incredibly removed from your sensibility, both time-wise and art-wise. I don't know about you, but Guernica is the kind of thing I'd have to be taught, like Shakespeare. I might never have a gut reaction to it.

That's unfair, actually. I have a gut reaction to a lot of Shakespeare, but that's because I already know the language -- English. Like I said bafore, I don't know the langusge of visual art enough to really get it.

isn't there some visual art that just grabs you though harold? by the sheer beauty of the colours or shapes, or the pain or fear depicted in the subject? is it really necessary to deconstruct something in order to "get it"?

i know absolutely nothing about visual art, but occasionally i see a painting or a photograph or even a sculpture that throws me for six

Well that's the question, innit? I don't find Guernica as horrifying on any level as Godfather, part II. Surely they're both abstractions for me, but one is within my paradigm, and the other isn't. One depresses me quite directly, and the other doesn't.

I admit, I am not made of stone.

http://www.minusfili.com/paintings_showcase/images/art-bailando500.jpg

http://karaart.com/artists/rayo/06.gif

i'm not sure what klimt's the kiss is *actually* about, but it makes me feel sad because it vividly depicts to me a love and a tenderness that i have never found to exist in real life, and it saddens me that i haven't and also it saddens me that i have doubt that it exists at all.

I do understand a lot of what goes on in at least the paintings I found pictures of. In that first painting, I'm struck by the sexual politic of the formsl dance, first and foremost. The way the dancers are identical, separated only by gender. The knees of the women, designed only to bend, but not to be substantial. There's implied movement in the painting, and then even more implied movement once you think about it for a minute. And a great deal of implied gender roles.

The second piece appeals to me on a pure graphic design level. The experiment here is all in the shading and perspective. In fact, without the odd shading and odd perspective, this would be nothing but a picture of some shapes. It appeals to me because it illustrates what is possible within the limitations of mere shapes and gradients (there's almost no color!). As an aspiring graphic and web designer, these are the elements that are dearest to my heart. I am insanely happy when people do new things with them.

Both of these pieces, BTW, are Latin-American. I fell in love with Latin-American art while a student at UT, which has one of the greatest collections in the world. During freshman and sophomore year, a favorite destination after taking acid or smoking pot was the second floor of the Ransom Center, which held all the latin artwork. It was all either purly color and texture, purley sex, or purely war. I will always have a taste for it.

again subjective! i love that everyone reacts so differently. although i have not studied this paingint in detail, i don't find your statement from it at all... the figures are separated by their gender and are not identical at all - i see the male dancers leading the female dancers, reflecting traditional gender roels in life, see the central couple the man holds the woman's right hand and the woman's left hand is on his chest, this suggests submission to me. interesting isn't it?

http://karaart.com/artists/rayo/06.gif

looks like four pastry bags all chopped off at an unexpected moment. I wish to hell I could imagine pastry bags that completely.

the works of art--be they films or books or music etc.--that i admire i don't admire for what they "have to say" in some book report-esque way, i admire them for the way they involve me in their process of becoming. an activity which seems to oppose itself to those things that are normally associated with depression, narrowly defined.

It really is all subjective though isn't it? I mentioned Rothko above - I wanted someone to ask me why I would think something like this is a sad/depressing (depressed?) work of art:

http://art.nmu.edu/larson/isit/oldstuff/rothko.jpg

(scans just dont capture the full force of a ten foot high oil painting though, either - which is a problem)