Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

van Gogh "Starry Night"

Y_lifter

Y_lifter

New member
My wife and I bought a real nice Reproduction of the below van Gogh this weekend "Starry Night".
I saw it, and though I have never been a specific van Gogh fan, I was drawn to it.
My wife comes up and says "You want that one don't you?"
I said no more, just kept starring.
We had it framed in a Great looking Plain BLACK frame that completes it.
Anyone else suddenly been drawn to a painting, especially the Impressionists?
*****************************************

0612.jpg
 
Y_Lifter said:
My wife and I bought a real nice Reproduction of the below van Gogh this weekend "Starry Night".
I saw it, and though I have never been a specific van Gogh fan, I was drawn to it.
My wife comes up and says "You want that one don't you?"
I said no more, just kept starring.
We had it framed in a Great looking Plain BLACK frame that completes it.
Anyone else suddenly been drawn to a painting, especially the Impressionists?
*****************************************

0612.jpg
Click to expand...

While Van Gogh was living, many people didn't realize just how amazing his work was. In death, he finally achieved infamy when many of his best paintings were revealed.

Picasso is another good modern impressionist.
 
I was an art major - can talk smack all day on this.
as could smalls and she will of course lay claim to talking more smack about it.

the only paintings, off the top of my head that "spoke" to me were Bacon's and Richter's
 
What it said to me was "All is quiet in the Valley, but the heavens are alive above".

This was the first painting I ever HAD to have for some reason.
It's only a repro but a good one.

Now to decide where it will hang....
 
I also really like the painting "the flowering peachtree" by Van Gogh.

You should also check out Monet who really brought impressionist paintings to an all new level. Of course, Monet also lived a lot longer than Van Gogh.
 
lamamacita said:
This was Van Gogh's vision from looking out of the window of a nut house. :mix:
Click to expand...

well, technically, he was in an asylum, but he had no windows.
it was painted from his visions.

most of the impressionists were heavy absinth users. there is a theory that the use of that with a pre-existing condition of VG's lead to his psychosis.
 
Legs1010 said:
He also did drugs. As did most artist and poets and writers.
Click to expand...

He was also an alcoholic....usually most very creative people are tormented in some way.
 
I am really into art, and S.Dali is among my favs....I have repo's of all his work, and numerous books on his, and others work....

Ranger
 
monet lived longer but went blind.

there is a theory that many of them got ill from their paints. cadmium yellow is a common color in their stuff - esp VG's.
many of them used a technique where the tip of the brush is licked to put a fine tip on the brush to get a certain shape.
this leads to ingestion of cadmium... not good.
 
Dali has become "poster art" along with Escher. popular with high school kids. they are both frowned upon in the art world since that is in a way "selling out" - even though it is their estate and not them that make that choice.

Dali was so strung out on drugs at the end of his life that they he got setup in a contract with a group of people that used his name to make money. they would sell cards that he autographed by the hundreds and even ran a shop where other people painted in his style, and then he would sign it. so if you see a dali from the 70's or so, it is not by him and worthless.
the way he signed it was slightly different.
 
HappyScrappy said:


there is a theory that many of them got ill from their paints. cadmium yellow is a common color in their stuff - esp VG's.
many of them used a technique where the tip of the brush is licked to put a fine tip on the brush to get a certain shape.
this leads to ingestion of cadmium... not good.
Click to expand...

interesting....i've never heard of this. I like Monet better than Van Gogh b/c he was very fluid with his brushing whereas Van Gogh was more estacato with his brushing. Monet was excellent with shadow and light through fluidity.
 
RyanH said:


interesting....i've never heard of this. I like Monet better than Van Gogh b/c he was very fluid with his brushing whereas Van Gogh was more estacato with his brushing. Monet was excellent with shadow and light through fluidity.
Click to expand...

Monet was more fluid? that is an interesting observation. esp in that Monet's brush "strokes" were rarely more than just a point, perhaps the length of the brush - whereas Van Gogh would actually drag the brush around, as well as take a palette knife and push that around as well to layer up the paint.

I suppose that show's Monet's skill. he was the first real impressionist with Impressionistic Sunrise. it was mocked by the press when it first came out, but it started the movement.
 
HappyScrappy said:


Monet was more fluid? that is an interesting observation. esp in that Monet's brush "strokes" were rarely more than just a point, perhaps the length of the brush - whereas Van Gogh would actually drag the brush around, as well as take a palette knife and push that around as well to layer up the paint.

I suppose that show's Monet's skill. he was the first real impressionist with Impressionistic Sunrise. it was mocked by the press when it first came out, but it started the movement.
Click to expand...

Monet didn't have dotting in all his paitings, dotting was not his expressive way of painting, when you see a Monet painting the colors become fluid---they fly. You look at many Van Gogh paintings and they are estacato manipulted, beautiful paintings. Example: the garden at Giverny or a woman with a parasol are perfect example of Monet's fluidity.

Van Gogh, however, manipulated colors for his purpose. In a MOnet painting there's always passion and beauty, but in a Van Gogh painting you always see passion and manipulation. (just my observations). Monet has a color roundness, but Van Gogh had a straight line brushing hand.
 
And my aim in my life is to make pictures and drawings, as many and as well as I can; then, at the end of my life, I hope to pass away, looking back with love and tender regret, and thinking, 'Oh, the pictures I might have made!'"
 
HappyScrappy said:


Monet was more fluid? that is an interesting observation. esp in that Monet's brush "strokes" were rarely more than just a point, perhaps the length of the brush - whereas Van Gogh would actually drag the brush around, as well as take a palette knife and push that around as well to layer up the paint.

I suppose that show's Monet's skill. he was the first real impressionist with Impressionistic Sunrise. it was mocked by the press when it first came out, but it started the movement.
Click to expand...

give me a good example of a Monet "estacatoness"....I can't really think of any.
 
RyanH said:


give me a good example of a Monet "estacatoness"....I can't really think of any.
Click to expand...

true - although I'm not sure what that word is ;)
not sure I recall its use in any class or reading.

as for the Monets I've seen, they are probably the only paintings I can think of that occasionally look better in print than they do in person - which largely has to do with the lighting.
when he built up the paint, it would give surfaces on which to toss the light around over top the large washes of a duller color undernearth - esp the case in the water lilly series.
 
HappyScrappy said:


true - although I'm not sure what that word is ;)
not sure I recall its use in any class or reading.

as for the Monets I've seen, they are probably the only paintings I can think of that occasionally look better in print than they do in person - which largely has to do with the lighting.
when he built up the paint, it would give surfaces on which to toss the light around over top the large washes of a duller color undernearth - esp the case in the water lilly series.
Click to expand...

what I meant by estacatoness is an abrupt brushing that has a short begining and ending, beginning with another beginning and ending....both showing different forms of shadow and light. Van Gogh used this form of painting throughout all of his landscapes, and yes, he used a long brushing at times but his main consistent absolute brushing to his paintings were always the same---estacato, effortless, manipulative paintings.
 
hmm, well then, are we both talking of the same Monet?
he was known for the short brush strokes - far shorter than even Van Gogh's.
VG put force and energy into it - you saw the expression, emotion, and force that he put into it.
Monet was far more methodical and dealt with the light much more.
Van Gogh would work more straight from the tube so to speak and Monet would spend much time getting just the right color via washes and even different canvases based on the light of the day.

Monet.gif


just that one alone in comparison to starry night even shows that Van Gogh is using longer strokes with less control (with purpose of course) and Monet has a controlled minute stroke that adds to the greater feel. adjoining blobs of color blending in the eye to give a sence of warmth and color.

I think we might be saying the same thing
 
HappyScrappy said:
Dali has become "poster art" along with Escher. popular with high school kids. they are both frowned upon in the art world since that is in a way "selling out" - even though it is their estate and not them that make that choice.

Dali was so strung out on drugs at the end of his life that they he got setup in a contract with a group of people that used his name to make money. they would sell cards that he autographed by the hundreds and even ran a shop where other people painted in his style, and then he would sign it. so if you see a dali from the 70's or so, it is not by him and worthless.
the way he signed it was slightly different.
Click to expand...

Visit his museum in Figueras, if you wanna see art as kitschy theatrical spectacle. His early work is interesting, including some fascinating parodies of Goya's etchings -- the specific reason I went to visit -- but the same impulse to parody made most of his work derivative.
 
I don't see the long strokes in this painting.....Yes, I do agree on the force of his brushing wich makes the colors he used a more definite distortion of the paint....I have never considered VG to be fluid...nor a great capturor of time....but a great painter with the beginnings of what the French IMPRESSIONISTS would became in the later years....Monet perfected his brush...VG didn't have the time to do that....

but I will defer to you since you are, afterall, the art major.....you may see this with a different eye....I'm simply going by my own observations
 
musclebrains said:


Visit his museum in Figueras, if you wanna see art as kitschy theatrical spectacle. His early work is interesting, including some fascinating parodies of Goya's etchings -- the specific reason I went to visit -- but the same impulse to parody made most of his work derivative.
Click to expand...

is that the legit museum? he has one that is a real musem with his stuff.
then there are museums all over the world that are part of a chain that you can pay to start anywhere. there is one on the outskirts of Paris... what the fuck is that town up on the hill, where the artists used to hang out - was a gang area, now is just a tourist attraction and lots of street painters?
anyway, there is a Dali museum there that is full of total crap and none of his stuff - just the shit he signed or mass produced.

I used to worship him in high school and read every book that was available about him, and still have a few books of his paintings.
he started out with an effort to be like the others, and then realized there was money in just doing strange things.
once he started copying de chirico, then there was really no turning back after that success.

some of his stuff was pretty cool - like his depiction of a hypercube unfolded as a cross to bear Jesus.

towards the end, his wife was one of the manipulating forces in his world, and she would keep him high on various drugs all the time and then encourage him to paint her.

most all writings say that he was actually gay and she was simply there as a managing force and she wouldn't allow him to leave.
 
RyanH said:
I don't see the long strokes in this painting.....Yes, I do agree on the force of his brushing wich makes the colors he used a more definite distortion of the paint....I have never considered VG to be fluid...nor a great capturor of time....but a great painter with the beginnings of what the French IMPRESSIONISTS would became in the later years....Monet perfected his brush...VG didn't have the time to do that....

but I will defer to you since you are, afterall, the art major.....you may see this with a different eye....I'm simply going by my own observations
Click to expand...

see, I said I thought we were making the same points.
Van Gogh used brush strokes of varying length as well as carving the paint around and layering it on with the pallette knife.

Monet didn't use long strokes at all. he used washes and small strokes (not to the degree of pointalism - but he was on the way)
 
HappyScrappy said:


see, I said I thought we were making the same points.
Van Gogh used brush strokes of varying length as well as carving the paint around and layering it on with the pallette knife.

Monet didn't use long strokes at all. he used washes and small strokes (not to the degree of pointalism - but he was on the way)
Click to expand...

thanxs for the insight...off to work now. later.
 
god damn... who was it who tried to call picasso an impressionist?

and that is my favourite van gogh painting besides the cafe at night one... actually the cafe at night one is my favourite. and the crab - saw in in LA.

his paintings are WAY tiny.

i think you held up pretty well in schooling these peeps scrappy.

oh, and i thought they made dali's freaky ass house into a museum.
 
HappyScrappy said:


is that the legit museum? he has one that is a real musem with his stuff.
then there are museums all over the world that are part of a chain that you can pay to start anywhere. there is one on the outskirts of Paris... what the fuck is that town up on the hill, where the artists used to hang out - was a gang area, now is just a tourist attraction and lots of street painters?
anyway, there is a Dali museum there that is full of total crap and none of his stuff - just the shit he signed or mass produced.

I used to worship him in high school and read every book that was available about him, and still have a few books of his paintings.
he started out with an effort to be like the others, and then realized there was money in just doing strange things.
once he started copying de chirico, then there was really no turning back after that success.

some of his stuff was pretty cool - like his depiction of a hypercube unfolded as a cross to bear Jesus.

towards the end, his wife was one of the manipulating forces in his world, and she would keep him high on various drugs all the time and then encourage him to paint her.

most all writings say that he was actually gay and she was simply there as a managing force and she wouldn't allow him to leave.
Click to expand...


The Figueras installation is the one he opened himself as the "Teatro Museo." A really good book about Dali, Lorca and Neruda came out a year or two ago, can't recall the title and stupidly loaned it to someone.

Basically, I despise impressionism, by the way. I recognize its importance but as a relentless romantic movement, I find it tiresome.
 
I just like to look at art and appreciate the beauty of the art work and the talent of the artist.:) I don't care to over analyze it. I understand those that do and that's cool.:)
 
Here's one of Small's fav's Huh?
Something about the "Wonder of the Night Sky" he captures very well for me..
*****
zfl_im_5543.jpg
 
Y_Lifter said:
Something about the "Wonder of the Night Sky" he captures very well for me..
Click to expand...

maybe you would enjoy some absinthe out on a porch one night :)
(remember to pour it over sugarcubes cause it tastes icky)
 
HappyScrappy said:


maybe you would enjoy some absinthe out on a porch one night :)
(remember to pour it over sugarcubes cause it tastes icky)
Click to expand...

Amazing the influence that shit had on art and poetry. Most of Rimbaud's work was written under the influence of absinthe hallucinations and he basically changed the course of modern poetry.
 
Originally posted by HappyScrappy
maybe you would enjoy some absinthe out on a porch one night :)
(remember to pour it over sugarcubes cause it tastes icky)
Click to expand...

Thanks for the Idea.

If that's what it takes to get the full effect, I'm on it like a Bum on a ham Sandwich...

I'm glad you are getting some return on your college investment with this post.

It's quite Obvious you know your shit about Art .....
 
I was just kidding on the absinthe.
1) hard to find the real shit anymore
2) it fucks with you pretty bad

as for my college investment - I was an art major and now I sit here doing programming :)
 
when I collected baseball cards, I can recall that Topps were the cards that were easiest to get, and they were the most known. yet true collectors didn't really care about them and pretty much didn't bother with them and left them to the newbies and instead went with the Upper Deck, or Fleer, and Score when that came out.

in the art world, that is sort of how Dali, Escher, Van Gogh, and Monet have become at this point. they are visually pleasing, so they are an easy entry point, but the art historians will act all bored if you try to mention that you actually enjoy the paintings.
they want something more thought provoking, harder to read, and generally things that allow them to hold themselves higher than the common viewer since they feel that they "get it" when in reality it is likely done by someone that is either dicking around or not all there mentally and doesn't necessarily even "get it" themselves.
 
My favorite painter you've probably never heard of outside California.
Eyvind Earle was one of the early Disney animators.
If you've ever seen the movie Sleeping Beauty or Fantasia
then you've seen his work.
He left Disney to become a serious artist.
I couldn't pass up buying this "Mystic Mountain".
I'm looking at it now, it hangs in my office.
ee_mystic_mountain.jpg
 
HS, You should realize that programming in a form of Art.

I will keep in mind not to mention these artists at my next Art Critic/Historian social gathering...:D

My wife and I are as far from being Art Critic's as Anal Assplorer is from being Hetrosexual.
 
john937 said:
My favorite painter you've probably never heard of outside California.
Eyvind Earle was one of the early Disney animators.
If you've ever seen the movie Sleeping Beauty or Fantasia
then you've seen his work.
He left Disney to become a serious artist.
I couldn't pass up buying this "Mystic Mountain".
I'm looking at it now, it hangs in my office.
Click to expand...

of guys that work with disney type stuff - this guy (Craig Mullins) is my favortie -> http://www.goodbrush.com

visually stunning as well as the technique that is used - but in terms of "art" it is not really anything more than fun to look at.
fine by me :)
 
i'm quite fond of manet's work.. it's more interesting than the impressionists.. and marks the (descent? ;) ) into impressionism.

btw van gogh was a post-impressionist peeps.

as for a few artists who influenced me the most... richter, duchamp, tansey.

i'm also very taken with wolfgang laib's sculpture.

in the art world, that is sort of how Dali, Escher, Van Gogh, and Monet have become at this point. they are visually pleasing, so they are an easy entry point, but the art historians will act all bored if you try to mention that you actually enjoy the paintings...
Click to expand...

that is so true. i frustrated myself in grad school trying to explain how this affects the perception of the art community... but i won't rant here... you and mb read my paper.

here's a drunken absinthe drinker by monet for y-lifter:

degas-labsinthe.jpg
 
HappyScrappy said:
when I collected baseball cards, I can recall that Topps were the cards that were easiest to get, and they were the most known. yet true collectors didn't really care about them and pretty much didn't bother with them and left them to the newbies and instead went with the Upper Deck, or Fleer, and Score when that came out.

in the art world, that is sort of how Dali, Escher, Van Gogh, and Monet have become at this point. they are visually pleasing, so they are an easy entry point, but the art historians will act all bored if you try to mention that you actually enjoy the paintings.
they want something more thought provoking, harder to read, and generally things that allow them to hold themselves higher than the common viewer since they feel that they "get it" when in reality it is likely done by someone that is either dicking around or not all there mentally and doesn't necessarily even "get it" themselves.
Click to expand...

That's a bit harsh, Mr. Skwappy. I don't think the desire to push the envelope beyond what's popular is necessarily motivated by self-aggrandizement. The Impressionists were certainly pushing the edge in their time and nobody found them very pleasing at the time.

Impressionism certainly represents a valid desire in the human being to see "through" the world, but the endless depiction of happy peasants toiling in the fields, boating parties and ballerinas simply doesn't relate fully to the world of object.s As an antidote to the grim effects of industrialization, it's fine but it's not enough.
 
smallmovesal said:

here's a drunken absinthe drinker by monet for y-lifter:

degas-labsinthe.jpg
Click to expand...

Isn't that Degas? He used to paint the ballerinas (which was considered to be at the level of prostitutes back then, not the respect that it gets today) and then he would paint the common man as well.
 
Last edited:
musclebrains said:


That's a bit harsh, Mr. Skwappy. I don't think the desire to push the envelope beyond what's popular is necessarily motivated by self-aggrandizement.
Click to expand...

okay, so you don't think that is the case, and I do.
after 4 years of dealing with those people on either side, it happens to be how I feel about it.

my experience with the art history kids in school was that they tended to be the daughters of wealthy businessmen. they had no real direction in their life, and due to dad's trust fund that they can rely on, they are then safe to explore any avenue they like for their job. they choose art history b/c it allows them to sit around with a glass of wine in their hand and discuss how and what someone else thought their way to the end result before them. they work at museums for crap wages, yet have the social status that they desire.

never much liked the art historians. and REALLY hate the architecture critics. least of all, the Mr. Burns look-alike Philip Johnson.
 
HappyScrappy said:


Isn't that Degas? He used to paint the ballerinas (which was considered to be at the level of prostitutes back then, not the respect that it gets today) and then he would paint the common man as well.
Click to expand...

yes, yes it is. wrote the wrong name in there.
 
HappyScrappy said:


okay, so you don't think that is the case, and I do.
after 4 years of dealing with those people on either side, it happens to be how I feel about it.

my experience with the art history kids in school was that they tended to be the daughters of wealthy businessmen. they had no real direction in their life, and due to dad's trust fund that they can rely on, they are then safe to explore any avenue they like for their job. they choose art history b/c it allows them to sit around with a glass of wine in their hand and discuss how and what someone else thought their way to the end result before them. they work at museums for crap wages, yet have the social status that they desire.

never much liked the art historians. and REALLY hate the architecture critics. least of all, the Mr. Burns look-alike Philip Johnson.
Click to expand...


and i'm going to have to agree with you, except to say that it's also regional.

when i lived in ontario it was entirely more stuck-up and as you described than it is out west, where i'm from.

that said, i love art history and art theory, but never studied it further because of the lack of positions and pay... another reason i quit my masters and took design. however, i'd like to continue them more as a side interest if i can.
 
I love VG as much as anyone. I've seen a number of his paintings and can stare for hours.

The most moving piece I ever saw was painted by Peter Paul Rubens. It was titled something like "the presentation of the head of john the baptist to salome."

This painting was part of a private collection, then purchased by Steven Wynn to be part of the original gallery at the Bellagio. When the original gallery was liquidated it was sold and I am not sure who owns it or where it is. This painting was large, painted in the 1600's I believe on two large oak planks. It is incredible.. it a painting, but look at it is almost like watching a short video.. it is full of action. Very moving, even breath taking.


More modern artists of current day that are excellent are:

Alex Grey www.alexgrey.com

and Cam de Leon www.happypencil.com

Brian
 
rub.jpg


normally his lighting is better and the skin is more vibrant - I would suspect either that is a bad photo, or the painting is dirty
 
Here is one of my favorite paintings. The artist is MS. V. :)

I hope she doesn't mind me posting it again.:)
 
smallmovesal said:
what's it about?
Click to expand...


It's called moody.....


I dunno what it's about, just a painting that she done that I like.:)


Of course I like everything velvett does, her writing, painting and anything else she does. She's a pretty cool lady. :angel:
 
Happy, that Picture says to me:

"Move over BillyBob, it be my turn to drive for a spell...."

OR

"Whooa! Watch out for that damn Immigrant Aricultural worker there"..
 
Y_Lifter said:
Happy, that Picture says to me:

"Move over BillyBob, it be my turn to drive for a spell...."

OR

"Whooa! Watch out for that damn Immigrant Aricultural worker there"..
Click to expand...

hee hee.
Rauschenberg did these things called "combines" where he combined a bunch of found items.
I always just pictured farm equipment.
I think he did one that poked fun at the idea that involved hay and farm equip if I recall the Guggenheim exhibit correctly.
a few of my profs were friends with him and they said he was quite strange and pretty much insane.

good times.
 
all i can see is the structure.

i love the simplicity wolfgang laib has...

it's called "milkstone".. he has milk on the top of the stone that sits in a gentle curve.

Liab_Milkstone.jpg
 
HappyScrappy said:


of guys that work with disney type stuff - this guy (Craig Mullins) is my favortie -> http://www.goodbrush.com

visually stunning as well as the technique that is used - but in terms of "art" it is not really anything more than fun to look at.
fine by me :)
Click to expand...

Wow, there's a link I never thought I'd see on Elite.

Craig Mullins did the artwork for a series of games called Marathon---some of my favorite games. I was working for a design studio at the time, and we had a prototype printer that would allow us to print on photo paper at sizes of up to 20" x 36". Some of his high-res pics made really cool posters.
 
yeah Y-Lifter - I always through Christo was cool, but a bit of a waste of money.
now anytime I'm out with my girlfriend and we see a building that is under construction or renovation and it has scaffolding and wrap around it, I point to it and say, ahhh, a new Christo.

at least one of us finds it funny.

and Project, that is cool - didn't know other people knew about him. he is damn good when I was into that scene I worshipped him in a way that isn't right.
 
HappyScrappy said:
it is one of the grate textures from Max Payne.
if I had to have a new avatar, I'd pick that.
Click to expand...

It looks like Venitian Blinds from a Rental unit in a Public Housing bldg.
 
Happy scrappy..


thanks for finding that image.. but that is not exactly the painting I saw...

The one I saw not only had men presenting the severed head of john the baptist.. but also another man with his foot on the body of john.. I believe his hands were bound.. blood was spraying from him neck.. both men (john and the executioner) were very muscular..

the painting was not dirty at all.. was crisp with vibrant colors (especially the red blood)

Brian
 
HappyScrappy said:
yeah Y-Lifter - I always through Christo was cool, but a bit of a waste of money.
now anytime I'm out with my girlfriend and we see a building that is under construction or renovation and it has scaffolding and wrap around it, I point to it and say, ahhh, a new Christo.

at least one of us finds it funny.

and Project, that is cool - didn't know other people knew about him. he is damn good when I was into that scene I worshipped him in a way that isn't right.
Click to expand...

I am completely confused. You like Mr. Christo's stuff and yet you say anyone pushing the envelope -- which such installations certainly are -- is motivated primarily by ego. I know that you also like Serrano's work. Would you say the same thing about him?

Why don't you post some of your own paintings, Scrappy? I bet people would enjoy seeing them.
 
I was in the area when Christo put up his Running Fence in the San Francisco area.
The general impression most people had at the time was he was a no talent sensationalist that wasted a lot of money grabbing his 15 minutes of fame.
christo.jpg
 
Last edited:
musclebrains said:


I am completely confused. You like Mr. Christo's stuff and yet you say anyone pushing the envelope -- which such installations certainly are -- is motivated primarily by ego. I know that you also like Serrano's work. Would you say the same thing about him?

Why don't you post some of your own paintings, Scrappy? I bet people would enjoy seeing them.
Click to expand...

I like Christo's stuff - it looks cool. I don't necessarily like the concept behind it - just think visually it is cool.... oooo, pretty colors and its big.
conceptually, he draws them all out in great detail on top of photos of the site - that alone is cool enough.
the fact that he follows through and uses all the materials - that is where I don't see the need.
he never funds it himself, he gets money from cities or wealthy single donors that want the publicity.
they are up for some time, serve no real purpose, get in the way, and then are taken down and trashed.

that is my beef with him.

I love Serrano, and he does things for exactly what I was saying - just for the sake of standing out and doing things differently - to get the attention. but I don't consider what he does wasteful.

and LOL, my own stuff is silly, so no need for that :)
 
musclebrains said:

You like Mr. Christo's stuff and yet you say anyone pushing the envelope -- which such installations certainly are -- is motivated primarily by ego.
Click to expand...

also, that particular comment was about the art historians/critics, not the artists. my comment was that the artists don't necessarily know that they are doing what the critics feel that they are.
so the critic thinks that it is a painting that is a critique of how the judicial system is an arbitrary mess based on improper judgements and biases (all bs that just popped into my head).
but say the painter really just thought that it was cool the way pink paint with a certain green added to it looks when on top of a black wash. or perhaps they just poorly drew their neighbor's cat.

it is to their favor to say nothing against the critic - or even if they do, the critics will say that they are fighting against predfined notions and either denounce them or applaud them, depending on how that view supports their own.

the whole thing is a big ego massaging thing that the artists aren't necessarily intentionally part of...
 
Last edited:
For the longest time I was into Mondrian.
When I lived near MOMA I would always visit this one. So rational, so balanced.
Of course, then everybody and his cousin started doing paintings like this (poorly), and it even came out in wallpaper.
That kind of killed it for everyone.
But I still think this one is one of his best.

mondrian.jpg
 
Last edited:
john937 said:
For the longest time I was into Mondrian.
When I lived near MOMA I would always visit this one. So rational, so balanced.
Of course, then everybody and his cousin started doing paintings like this (poorly), and it even came out in wallpaper.
That kind of killed it for everyone.
But I still think this one is one of his best.
mondrian.jpg
Click to expand...

the L'Oreal (sp?) design is what killed it dead.

Mondrian would start with a complex drawing - say of a willow tree, and then step by step would remove, anything that he didn't deem necessary to get the idea across. from color to line, he would progressively strip it.

the end result never really did much for me - but the process I felt was cool.
 
Here's the tree I think your referencing.
I think it's works (failures?) like this that caused him to move on to the geometrics.
mondrian.jpg


The other modernist I really liked was Kandinsky.
Keep in mind this was painted in 1923.
kandinsky-composition2.jpg
 
Last edited:
there is a recent game called, I think, "Rez" that was inspired by Kandinsky

I haven't seen it - but I know the designer won awards for it. it apparently changed the audio and visuals based on actions that you take in the game.
 
QUOTE]Originally posted by HappyScrappy


also, that particular comment was about the art historians/critics, not the artists. my comment was that the artists don't necessarily know that they are doing what the critics feel that they are.
so the critic thinks that it is a painting that is a critique of how the judicial system is an arbitrary mess based on improper judgements and biases (all bs that just popped into my head).
but say the painter really just thought that it was cool the way pink paint with a certain green added to it looks when on top of a black wash. or perhaps they just poorly drew their neighbor's cat.

it is to their favor to say nothing against the critic - or even if they do, the critics will say that they are fighting against predfined notions and either denounce them or applaud them, depending on how that view supports their own.

the whole thing is a big ego massaging thing that the artists aren't necessarily intentionally part of... [/QUOTE]


Oh, okay, I misunderstood you. Now post your paintings, bitch.
 
he stores them by carefully propping them against the wall in the middle of a high traffic area... almost willing them to be destroyed.
 
First comes the elemental, primitive stage, trying on new forms and techniques, in this case, exploring the art of paint spats.
//www.mlms.logan.k12.ut.us/~ksuisse/1paintedword/splat2.JPG
 
Last edited:
Of course once you've found your genre, success is all about cranking out a collector's series.
b9125n0p.jpg

splat.jpg

red_splat.gif
 
Last edited:
An exhuberance of bad taste. Deleted.

I once spent the afternoon at a professional artists studio,
he was doing a series of watercolors, birds nests.
He had about 20 pages lined up.
He'd go down the line, one after another, making just about the same mark on each,
varying each just a bit to make them "originals".
Turned me off of art for years.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jasonhill800
Napsgear, Grow Massive Triceps with These Techniques
Replies
16
Views
4K
ballin2504
ballin2504
jasonhill800
Napsgear Article: More and Better Sex (For the Ladies)
Replies
14
Views
4K
BodyMonster34
BodyMonster34
Macedog24
The best STEROIDS for your arsenal to get MONSTER SIZE + Hardcore bulking article
Replies
8
Views
4K
Tazz
Tazz
M
Should I cruise forever?
Replies
15
Views
3K
dylangemelli
dylangemelli
G
Hell yeah, I'm no longer on insulin
Replies
6
Views
820
MasonicBodybuilder
MasonicBodybuilder
Top Bottom