About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1


Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 20

Saturday, June 18, 2005 - 9:53pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Hong,

 

The scientist examining outside herself! Hong, I am just doing the same with my own particular scope.

 

Michael




Post 21

Monday, June 20, 2005 - 7:24amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Michael,
I guess I better explain where my little skit about Picasso and the boy come from.

Since I don't understand the technical aspects of the painting at all, the only thing I go with is how it make me feel by looking at it. You are right that I don't usually know where all that come from.

I agree with you that the boy looks "moody, dark, serious," "sullen", and maybe "a little crazy". These are all sort of negative adjectives. So looking at the picture I tried to think what could be the positive and lighter things in the boy: I thought he could be spirited, and perhaps could be smart. So that's where that little skit come from. Though I wouldn't be surprised if I got it all wrong...

Hong 

(Edited by Hong Zhang on 6/20, 7:35am)




Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 22

Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 8:55amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Just for the record, there is no newed to make a composition centralised and balanced, we are talking art here, not graphic design, centalisation is one of the first things you inlearn, a lopsidedness can create an unease that is attention grabbing, Picasso could paint with a technical skill that is more or less unparelelled. Who progressed to a more primative perspective because it was part of his journey as an artist, He painted this picture the way he wanted to, not because he was incapable of fullfilling the requirements lacking according to many of those on this thread.

His work is honest expression of his thinking at the time, he didnt really give a stuff wether it sold or not, as he could squiggle a turd on a page and dumb arse ignorant wealthy art clooectors would pay a mint for it none the less.....

I believe this nearly deove him insane, but i guess it mode him personally the only reliable critic of his own art.

The primitivism his art tended towards is largely atributed to the popularity of tribal art which was causing a stir in european culture at the time, in philosophical circles creating idea of the noble savage, popularised by rousseau i think...

This is high school shit.... what are you guys? commerce students?



Post 23

Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 5:40pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
No, we simply don't hold to a mind-body dichotomy.

You use the term shit as an insult, yet you praise an artist who cynically and very often put turds down. Witness the exhibit.

)(*)(




Post 24

Tuesday, September 20, 2005 - 4:27pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
What struck me about the painting immediately was the odd (artfully posed?) manner in which the boy held the pipe, and the flora behind him in the fashion of wings.  The rose garland and the loose clothing also accentuate the mood of languorous, earthy romanticism.  He's almost an angel, but not the heavenly kind...

I think the question of the self-portrait is brilliant!  It made me think of what I'd want someone to paint of ME (to show others) and how it may or may not be different than the one I'd do of myself, for myself.




Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1
User ID Password reminder or create a free account.