"I got more publicity from this little joke... than from all the serious work I ever did over many decades."

March 24, 2007 10:34 PM

A hoax that embarrassed the art world: Pavel Jerdanowitch and the Disumbrationist School of Painting . This "joke on the art critics" was perpetrated by Paul Jordan-Smith, a former pastor who had left his calling after being charged with heresy. He went on to become a writer, editor and journalist, and in 1924 he decided to commit blasphemy against "the strange gods of modern art." The Pavel Jerdanowitch Painting Contest was inspired by the hoax. "The challenge is to produce the worst painting every painted." It's not too late to submit your own entry for 2007. You can check out last year's entries, including the "loser" (winner), for inspiration.
posted by amyms (33 comments total)

While you're at the reverent.org links, be sure to check out their home page for more articles, quizzes and silliness related to arts and literature.
posted by amyms at 10:36 PM on March 24, 2007

My score on the "true art vs. fake" quiz lined from the article: 75% "correct." I call that a pass! Suck it, modern art haters.
posted by nanojath at 10:40 PM on March 24, 2007

Checking Jordan-Smith's seven "hoax" paintings, I must say they're rather likeable, and have that characteristic of "naive" or "outsider" art which has become so accepted in recent years. This makes the whole "hoax" aspect, when viewed through our modern-day lens of what art can and/or should be, all the more interesting. Thanks for the great post, amyms!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 10:47 PM on March 24, 2007

I got 83% on the quiz.
posted by Tlogmer at 10:51 PM on March 24, 2007

Contenders?
posted by agentofselection at 10:56 PM on March 24, 2007

Nice find, amyms!
Check out "museumofbadart.org" for more stuff that'll make yer eyes bleed...
posted by Dizzy at 11:01 PM on March 24, 2007

I liked Jaws v. Kotex, actually.
posted by ClaudiaCenter at 11:04 PM on March 24, 2007

Contenders?

Definitely. That kind of sci-fi airbrush stuff is far worse than any of the bad art on the Pavel Jerdanowitch Painting Contest!

At least, according to this art critic...
posted by flapjax at midnite at 11:06 PM on March 24, 2007

Thanks for the extra links, agentofselection and Dizzy... I actually enjoy some of the stuff that other people consider to be "bad"... And I can't really get into some of the stuff that other people consider to be "good"... I guess I am the epitome of the quote: "I don't know art, but I know what I like"...

And flapjax, I agree with your assessment of the hoax paintings... I thought some of them were very likeable.
posted by amyms at 11:18 PM on March 24, 2007

If you are truly committed to making bad art, I don't think you will succeed. The best bad art is when people are sincere but fail miserably, since there is such a divergence between intent and conclusion. When sincerity falls flat, there is something really gross about it.
posted by Falconetti at 11:21 PM on March 24, 2007 [3 favorites]

When sincerity falls flat, there is something really gross about it.

I like that. That statement could apply to so much more than just artistic efforts.
posted by amyms at 11:23 PM on March 24, 2007

Hey, I quite like "The Eyes!" Maybe that's why it's 25th place out of 27....
posted by JHarris at 11:29 PM on March 24, 2007

Stellar links. Seconding flapjax - the Disumbrationist paintings are clearly genius examples of outsider art, but, you know, like a century ahead of their time or something. (But seriously, I would frame one of those prints!)

I also got 75% on the quiz. Gentleman's C!
posted by Banky_Edwards at 11:29 PM on March 24, 2007

Excellent post! I only got 67% on the real/fake quiz.
posted by owhydididoit at 12:12 AM on March 25, 2007

I also liked the Disumbrationist paintings. Part of me says, who cares what the artist thinks I should think of them?
posted by owhydididoit at 12:16 AM on March 25, 2007

My new career awaits!
posted by Salmonberry at 12:46 AM on March 25, 2007

You like this painting I made?
WELL THE JOKES ON YOU! IT'S A BAD PAINTING! HA HA HA!!!
posted by Citizen Premier at 12:51 AM on March 25, 2007 [1 favorite]

You know, I don't really understand what "the hoax" was all about. Jerdanowitch was was rejecting and mocking modern art and the world that surrounded it; much like Punk rockers rebeled against a bloated and self-satisfied music industry in the 1970s. He was commenting on his times and that, in and of itself, is artistic self-expression. His little "joke"is even more vindicated now, when you consider the Pop Art movement that was yet to follow, and which was considered a "true" school of art. Andy Warhol had nothing on this guy.
posted by RayOrama at 12:55 AM on March 25, 2007

92 percent on the quiz. The only one I got wrong was the Klee... but when I saw it I thought, "That looks a lot like a Klee, but it's not obviously a Klee (like the Rothko is obviously a Rothko)... so it's probably an imitation of a Klee meant as a trap." I overthought it and deked myself out -- shoulda gone with the gut. Stupid Iocaine powder shennanigans get the best of me every time.

I really hate the "my child could have drawn this!" reaction to modern art. Art is nothing without context. You can't expect to like a painting unless you know how it's responding to prior generations of artists. Those who deride modern art don't understand where it's coming from and don't care. They want a piece of art to explain itself, as if it's giving a lecture or monologue. But engaging in visual art (or listening to music, or reading literature or philosophy, etc.) is more like listening in on a dialogue with the whole of cultural history. If you don't know what one side is saying, you'll never be able to eavesdrop.
posted by painquale at 12:57 AM on March 26, 2007

privet!
posted by goodglovin77 at 3:10 AM on March 26, 2007

92% correct. And I detest abstract impressionism.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 3:56 AM on March 26, 2007

This makes me an angry penguin.
posted by seanyboy at 3:55 AM on March 26, 2007

The symbols were evident,
Though on park-gates
The iron birds looked disapproval
With rusty invidious beaks.
posted by seanyboy at 4:25 AM on March 26, 2007

You can't expect to like a painting unless you know how it's responding to prior generations of artists.

I can and do - just as I would with a book or a piece of music. Knowing art history may enhance my enjoyment, but it's not essential.

More than happy for you to enjoy your dialogue with cultural history, but that's a second-order thing, not what visual art is. A good piece of art may be part of art history, but that's not what makes it good, any more than being part of the history of cooking is what makes a bacon sandwich worth having.
posted by Phanx at 5:27 AM on March 26, 2007

Faulkner, to my eye mind in staring focused deeply, bullshit and mystery thrust as is German machine translation onto screen.
posted by Meatbomb at 5:56 AM on March 26, 2007

A good piece of art may be part of art history, but that's not what makes it good, any more than being part of the history of cooking is what makes a bacon sandwich worth having.

QFT

If we didn't know the cultural connections to Elvis, would a deep-fried peanut-butter and bacon sandwich still taste so good?
posted by bashos_frog at 5:56 AM on March 26, 2007

Despite having never really studied art, and not particularly liking anything past the surrealists, I got an 83% on the test just going through it quickly and following my gut.

That said, in my estimation, the only one of "Jerdanowitch's" paintings I think shows any talent is Illumination. Accidental or not, I think he stumbled upon something fairly remarkable there.
posted by InnocentBystander at 9:21 AM on March 26, 2007

I can and do - just as I would with a book or a piece of music. Knowing art history may enhance my enjoyment, but it's not essential.

I disagree... I think you've just got a lot more tacit knowledge of music and painting and literature than you realize. Elvis and jazz and rock would have sounded terrible to Bach; Joyce and Faulkner and Nabokov would have been offensively bad to Augustine. Cultural priming has secretly given you an education in finding value in the things you like.
posted by painquale at 11:26 AM on March 26, 2007

I like the old fashioned, representational art, and never felt that it was "killed by the invention of the camera." I even liked the surreal stuff. But I lost interest in modern art when an art major told me that the "mere art object" is no longer important. "Anyone can learn technique and the purely mechanical." What was important, I was told, was the critical reaction to art. "What do important people say about this piece?" I began to notice that attitude elsewhere.

At this point I moved from a bewildered, "I don't get it, but maybe we should fund it" stance to an outright dislike of modern art, as I can no longer look at it without envisioning a copy of Vogue, with large empty white rectangles, and Glass Bead Game-like critiques of critiques of critiques of the Emperor's new clothes.
posted by adipocere at 1:55 PM on March 26, 2007

Missed 1 one the FAKE ART quiz. So there...
posted by cccorlew at 2:18 PM on March 26, 2007

You know that time when the Emperor was going to show off his new clothes but came out naked instead? That was a brilliant and subversive piece of performance art. Love it, plebs!
posted by painquale at 2:52 PM on March 26, 2007

42% here, but then I have a long-standing dislike of the modern art world, dating back to my grade school days when I was hauled in front of this during a field trip.

This all reminds me of The Sokal Affair, which also tickled me pink.

/ suck it, loverz
posted by The Card Cheat at 4:54 PM on March 26, 2007

A cool 100% on the true vs. fake quiz. MY MODERN ART KNOWLEDGE IS UNSTOPPABLE!!!!!!!!!1
posted by scody at 8:08 PM on March 26, 2007