>>4204095>Good enoughhave you seen what "art" galleries have called "good" over the years?
It was never about good. It was about an agenda and an investment scam. If you do not further their agenda, you aren't "good", even if you ARE GOOD. For one, modern art has always been a method of marxist critique. It is about using art as an ideological weapon while denying that anyone else can use art as an ideological weapon.
In fact, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR PHOTOGRAPHY, OR ANY MODERN ART, TO BE GOOD. It is low art. It is a snapshot, an advert, a single note absent of a song. From photos to "abstract" paintings to nonsense sculptures - none of these are art, they are piecemeal. The gallery owners are the artist. You are submitting raw materials for consideration. The gallery owner only cares if your photography can be used to align with his agenda. As a mere photographer you will never be an artist and can never be an artist. Photographs are paint, not paintings.
If you understood art you would understand this.
