Posted on 12/06/2017 1:26:55 PM PST by Borges
Maybe they'd just glue a codpiece on him, LOL.
Not what I said, I said she would find it not be a well structured piece with little flow. The piece consists of a line on top which takes you straight across, a non action set of darker colors on the mid left, a larger brighter set of colors on the mid right, and another set of darker colors on the bottom right. None of them are well connected and there is no lead that draws one into or across the painting. There is little motion at all.
I never said she was better than him.
But as a proud papa I’d put her’s up - you can find some here:
The Portfolio with the last name Reed is her’s.
I think it is brighter, contemporaneous, and better structured.
I've never seen this particular painting, up close, in person, at the Met ( since where it hangs isn't one of my favorite galleries ), and don't remember ever seeing it. Though I did used to enjoy going through the "modern" section, to see the Edward Hooper stuff.
We spent a week in Friendship, ME and toured around from there. Beautiful in the summertime.
Can you imagine just what their reaction would be, re all of the Italian and French PUTTI paintings, or some by Degas ?
Honi soit qui mal y pense
Oh, yeah, the little ballet dancers by Degas. So much art involves beautiful young people. Why not?
Yes, it is. Did you visit the guy in Friendship who has the bottle museum?!
We did not. Hadn’t heard of it.
Oh, it’s crazy. It’s right in Friendship and it’s just a guy in a garage who has arranged colorful bottles in a beautiful and unique way. He calls bottles his “passion.” A true American eccentric.
And he captured them in some rather strange positions, to boot!
But Degas was a true "MASTER" and an expert of not just one area but several!
Yes, artists have painted/sculpted/drawn beautiful young boys and girls, because of their beauty...which actually IS the whole point; unless the artist is known for grotesqueries. Hieronymous Bocsh and Henri de Toulouse-Latrec,to name but two artists who did paint grotesqueries, also painted beautiful young things as well, though.
Leonardo painted really horrific grotesques - from life. Medieval people looked a lot worse than we do!
Apparently this guy did a ton of similar stuff, I think he had issues.
"Mr. Melon, your wife was just showing us her Klimt."
"You too, huh? She's shown it to everybody."
If it wasn’t for that scene, I’d never know who Klimt was.
Yes, people have somewhat changed in the way they look; which is a very recent development in the history of mankind. A lot of it can be attributed to dietary and work changes, but the big things are mostly because we've conquered a lot of diseases, dentistry, surgery methods, and a larger pool of people with whom we can choose to marry and have children with.
He drew mountain people who obviously suffered from goiter. That’s certainly now a rare problem in the west. People don’t know that in England, men were much taller in medieval times than they were during the Industrial Revolution. Bad food, bad work conditions destroyed their health.
Yes, some people were quite tall, in past eras; it usually depended quite a lot on where one was born, diet, and social strata.
And re grotesqueries...people used to be born with hair lips ( which couldn't be fixed ), other kinds of physical deformities, were deformed by different kinds of illnesses, and developed hunchbacks. And there were also accidents and war injuries that just couldn't be fixed/compensated for, as they can be today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.