So someone has a database of art phrases and madlibs them together next to pieces of art? Are we supposed to feel superior to people who create art now? I don't. Why is it that people who claim to be 'analytical' always just use it as an excuse to claim anything they don't understand is meaningless?
I spent my first minute trying to click everything and anything to no avail.<p>It's worth mentioning that refreshing the page loads another image and description in a random combination.
It's just randomized, right?<p>Or have I been misreading Caillebotte's "Paris Street; Rainy Day" (1876-1877)[1] as "High Impressionism" when all along it's really been "An Abstraction of Classicism" ;)<p>[1] <a href="http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/citi/images/standard/WebLarge/WebImg_000281/215300_3365286.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/citi/images/standard/We...</a>
How does this work? It doesn't appear interactive, the title doesn't match the painting (though has similarities to the actual piece), and the text on the right seems like a total joke based on the painting industry's practice of teaching artists how to use impressive-sounding gibberish so rich patrons look smart and the uninitiated feel unintelligent.
A portrait of Jesus being crucified from the 16th century is apparently a contemplation for kitsch and fetishism and Olympia is a cogitation for evocative postmodernism?
The code to this is <a href="https://github.com/kiranw/HackingArts-2015" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/kiranw/HackingArts-2015</a>