Posted by o4c 5 hours ago
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Cheval#Palais_id%C3%...
For fairly bad, may we present MOBA?
It is a bit like punk rock. After you've heard one or 2 songs from Ramones then you've heard them all. Surely, Ramones, once in a while, can be fun. But after the 3rd song I feel that all they're saying is "we wish we were the Beatles".
Similarly, naive art can be fun, almost as much as Brueghel. But after the 100th 3rd World village with rivers and palm trees I just want to go back to Rembrandt.
Can an artist who submits their work to this gallery -- which features the word in its very name -- really be called "naive"?
I can't tell that the works are "naive" in any sense -- they look no better or worse to me than other artwork -- and I feel no desire to change that by "educating" myself on how "non-naive" art is supposedly better.
The problem with “unconventional” is that these works are anything but. As far as I can tell, the most of the paintings presented on the site follows a particular style. I don't think someone who is inspired to paint after watching the Joy of Painting would necessarily end up with something like this, so it's not just about being amateurish. It's also quite likely that some of the painters are anything but self-taught and have chosen to paint in this particular way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niko_Pirosmani https://www.artsy.net/artist/niko-pirosmani https://louisiana.dk/en/exhibition/niko-pirosmani/