re: In Each Of These Paintings, I Ask WHY

quote:

---

Although all true, it's still a load of bullshite.

---

And no one knows more about bullshite than a Texan.

quote:

---

The chick in the first painting has a penis on her face.

---

Picasso was around 50yo slamming a 22 year old mistress when this was done. That's really all you need to know about this one and his work around 1930-35.

quote:

---

I think he'd just rather spend that kind of money on, I dunno, things like:

- A house
- A child's education
- Donate to charity
- Invest
- Save for retirement/emergency

---

I'm guessing the people who can afford these paintings already have that stuff covered.

You can look at a Michelangelo, Raphael, or da Vinci painting and realize it is objectively brilliant. Especially in the context of that period of European art and how much it advanced with those guys in a matter of centuries.

You can't look at any of those and tell me it's objectively great.

The technical abilities of art has only gotten marginally better since the Renaissance. By that I mean, how well could someone who took illustration seriously paint. And that's thanks to contributions during the Renaissance. When we entered modernism, it was all about artificial meaning in the paintings and just hoping the herd mentality picked you up.

you're trash for callin him trash.

quote:

---

how is art that looks like the guy jammed a few gallons of paint in his arse then farted towards a canvas, "critically important"?

---

How can a guy can take a perfectly tuned, clear sounding guitar and add distortion to it to make it sound fuzzy be critically important?


But to answer your question about Pollock, he was the punk rocker of the art world. He literally turned the art world over. Instead of applying a solid oil from brush to canvas, he took the canvas and laid it on the floor and dripped the paint from a liquid form onto the canvas. He stopped using the traditional form of painting. upright, easel, brushes, solids, etc. and moved to other methods. Sounds simple now doesn't it? Just like a three chord punk rock band is simple in principle but the rawness and power is the attraction.


Oh and it helps he was already known in the inner circles of the art world and Peggy Guggenheim liked his work.

quote:

---

Wow. You can just feel the internal turmoil of the artist in this one. His brooding nature, my goodness. This painting just screams societal burdens and a false sense of reality we all carry.

Would sell my left nut and a kidney just to be in the same room as this painting.

---

Mark Rothko is a talent less hack but all design students and art collectors got together and decided to blow him for some reason.

If I can do it more often than not it isn't art.

quote:

---

Mark Rothko is a talent less hack but all design students and art collectors got together and decided to blow him for some reason.

---

Rothko's work just affected you like he wanted it to. That's what he wanted it to do. Evoke an emotion or a response. It appears his art worked.

His solid colors were an attempt to somewhat mock the abstract art work going on at the time. Why not strip a painting all the way back down to just color?

quote:

---

If I can do it more often than not it isn't art.

---

If you could do it, you'd be doing it. Just because you can replicate something, doesn't mean you could do what he did.



Oh and Peggy Guggenheim decided to start collecting his work too.