She's so modern

[dogfrank]

Following the Ivan Massow-ICA question, you do have to ask what a lot of post-war art is all about. Bridget Riley: some lines; Jackson Pollock: dribbled paint; etc. (obvious egs, I know). I'm sure it makes lovely wall paper, but apply the Massow Test to it.

[Waterwolf]

The point of a lot of modern (or I suppose we should really call it postmodern) art is precisely that it has no point. Traditional art depicts things as though it's a reflection of reality,then along comes a movement like Cubism that says that a painting isn't reflecting reality and tries to show multiple viewpoints at once. Then someone decides to paint things you can conceive of but can't experience in reality (abstract art). And taking this to its logical conclusion, we get art that refuses to represent anything -- artists can put anything in a gallery, and it will be art for the sole reason that it's in a gallery. But most people don't understand all this (and I'm sure I'm not the only one who understands it but doesn't agree with it), so modern art just looks like rubbish. Monet for old rope, perhaps.