I am delighted that no one here seems too intimated by me to post such comments!!! hahahah.

My god, Jonathan posted something backing me up, at least indirectly...gosh!

I guess art for me is not only about idealism and action (they also matter a great deal to me). I big part is feeling related to the work. In this case the boy reminds me of how I felt as a teenager: moody, dark, serious even though I lived in a good natured athletic blond shell. My first book which  I enjoyed reading was Doskevesky, The Possessed. This boy looks almost sullen and a little crazy…I don’t see any dirtiness in the colors…I find them sensual enough to eat…and I find the light magnificent…Picasso has a lot of neutralized color (perhaps what Num++ means by dirty)…and when he zaps a highlighted color is magical for me…like the light/color highlights on the face…with the very neutral shadows. There is quite a bit of light on the wall on the left also along with Jonathans comment about the negative space of the composition helps balance…

Michael

Michael, I now understand your artistic tastes much better than I did before, because you stated that the means matters to you more than the subject matter. This makes perfect sense to me, because it mirrors my own taste in literature, where I immensely value literary style, and usually above content.

I don't have the same reaction as you to painting. But perhaps I would if I were a professional.

Barbara

This boy looks almost sullen and a little crazy

Of course!

I’ll stick my neck out one more time by imagining what might have happened when Picasso was painting the boy

Boy:      I don’t like to sit for you, Signor.

P:          I’ll give you 100 pesos.

Boy:      Um…ok…plus your pipe!

P:          What?! Then you’ll have to put on this flower wreath!

Boy:      Yucks! (Saying to himself -Alright Signor. But this is what you’re going to get.)

Boy squinted his eyes and made a sullen face. Picasso sketched away….

(Sorry Michael, can’t help it…)

Num++,

Actually, I am in the wrong. Sometimes I hold a context without clearly letting other people know what that is!

I hope you find it worthwhile that you have taken the time to analyze the painting.

Composition is about how an artist divides up positive (the form of the subjects) and negative (the space surrounding and in-between forms). Light and shadow can also have compositional “weight”. Negative shape is of equal importance to positive. (Yin and yang kinda thing.) In the Picasso piece, there are slashing diagonal light and shadow shapes…the brightest rose color and lights on the wall are on the left side. There is also a casted shadow on the left which some of it falls on his leg.

In painting I have never been a fan of formal symmetry in composition. Something like a formal garden. I much prefer and respect organic balance in composition. Think of an architect breaking up the monotony of the box.

Have you ever been to a French country estate? If so you would recognize peach colored wash that often stain the walls. And if you have been to the Mediterranean you would recognize that many French, Italian, and Greek people have a pale olive green complexion in the winter.

The most simple way to understand reasonable perspective is that objects get bigger when they are closer to you…in this case his elbow is coming forward and increases in size compared to his shoulder. The head of the pipe gets smaller as it recedes in the opposite direction from us.

Back to lighting…there is a very subtle highlight on the wall it echoes the highlight on his hand…this recreates a rhythm.

With color, atmospheric perspective and organic composition demand lots of nuance in color…clean sheets of color are more often than not are flat…there is a lot of nuance in the Picasso…the blue clothes have lots of changeups like a good pitcher…as a painter you never what to have generic color…subtle nuance is essential.

One essential thing you don’t see is atmospheric perspective…that is why the flowers are faded and not in crystal clear color…if he did that it would flatten the painting by bring the paint to the surface.

You might be interested in my observations on 2^nd and 3^rd dimensional composition in drawing, Picasso is a master of that: http://www.michaelnewberry.com/studioupdate/2003-06/

Michael

Hi Hong,

I was thinking...

If you were to paint a self-portrait what would it look like? What kind of clothes would you wear? Your Sunday best or a lab smock? Or perhaps it might be a nude? What would you have for the background? Would you smile? What would be pose and angle of the head? And it can't be any simple pose no? Would it represent your deepest self? Would you be happy? Sad? Ruthless or fearful? Or competent? A mom? Lover? A little crazy, driven, or totally at peace?

Michael