Image

Renaissance vs Modern

4/28/2014, 1:52 pm
User avatar
Renaissance_vs_Modern.jpg
Found this one interesting, comrades.

Visual arts

Early first century Roman art was more or less terrible, usually containing nothing more than a stone arch or an aqueduct. However, the Renaissance began in Italy in the late Middle Ages producing some of the only artists that Americans have ever heard of, including the guy who painted the Mona Lisa and the dude with the sculptures and that ceiling thing. With them came great works of art, mainly paintings of Jesus and other biblical figures and of course, pictures of naked people. Famous works include da Vinci's The Last Supper, a painting depicting the only biblical scene that involves food; Michelangelo's David, an early example of softcore pornography; and Botticelli's The Birth of Venus, a portrait of Roman Goddess Venus standing nude atop a seashell. After the Renaissance, though, Italy had little more to contribute to art, and modern-day Italian art includes mainly splatters of paint on a canvas or photographs of naked people, not to mention crude drawings.
Back to top
4/28/2014, 4:12 pm
User avatar
The splattering painting on the right depicts the Statue of Liberty being attacked by New York Mayor, Comrade de Blasio. Notice the symbolic blood dripping from the base of the statue as the good mayor tries to topple her. Brilliant! How much for this modern treasure?
Back to top
4/28/2014, 6:38 pm
User avatar
Stone???? Paint???? How can you have art without feces and urine?
Back to top
4/28/2014, 9:32 pm
User avatar
https://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Kosovo
Back to top
4/29/2014, 11:30 pm
User avatar
Comrade Opiate, the bigger question is "Is it federally funded?" If not, then it's not art.
Back to top

 
POST REPLY

Return to “People's Blog”