Skip to main content
Dictionary
Store
Blog
World
Help
Advertise
Chat
System Status
Information Collection Notice
Trademark Concerns
reCAPTCHA Privacy
Terms of Service
reCAPTCHA Terms
Privacy Policy
Accessibility
Report a Bug
Data Request
Contact Us
Security
DMCA
© 1999–2026 Urban Dictionary ®
Mugs
Tees
Hoodies
Pro Customization
Create unique products with your own words and definitions
Preview
Personalize Your Design
Your Word
Your Definition
- noun an “artistic” movement reflective of post-WWII America’s industrial dominance. Just as GM was able to slap together shitty cars & dump them on the “free” world, American "artists" figured they could slap any shit they wanted onto a canvas & declare it artistically "relevant". As the philosopher P.T. Barnum observed, a sucker’s born every minute, & so the shit sold. A major reason these artists sucked was they couldn’t stay inside the lines. They side-stepped this seeming career-killer by ignoring the lines & marketing themselves as rebellious, anarchic, idiosyncratic & nihilistic which explains A LOT about why the “art” looks the way it does… when you set out to paint shit, you end up with art that looks like shit. Eventually the art world caught on to the scam, forcing the “artistes” to rebrand themselves as trailblazers in other bogus schools like “Post-painterly Abstraction”, “Color Field Painting”, “Lyrical Abstraction”, “Action Painting”, “Minimal Art”, “Post-minimalism”, & eventually some crap labeled "Neo-expressionism", a style so insignificant it barely escaped the late-70s. Given the paucity of talent in the artists who inspired them (e.g., Amedeo Modigliani, Max Jacob) it’s no wonder their works have the aesthetic appeal of a dog’s breakfast. Truth be told, most were frustrated poseurs who couldn't handle composition & perspective, & burned out on cocaine in the 70s to escape their anger at just missing the free-love movement of the 60s.
Text fits
Save
Cancel