[Sam Cree]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply on classicism.

I like the Caravaggio alot, it has an almost 19th century look to it. Rubens' drawings knock me out more than his paintings do. I don't know if I think his stuff is pompous, though, too full of movement maybe. Agreed that all the flourishes are.

The Ingres odalisk has always looked out of proportion to me, although I believe only her torso is too long. I much prefer the Delacroix, or even that Manet Olympia one that you guys had up a while ago.

I had put Rockwell and the comic artists in the classical category because they continue to follow, or at least be aware the old Greek canons of proportion and at least their own interpretations of what comprises beauty. They draw well, IOW. But I guess if you don't consider realists to be in the classical tradition, you would not include folks like Thomas Eakins or Pascal Dagnan-Bouveret?

[Rembrandt_fan]

You wrote, "The Ingres odalisk has always looked out of proportion to me, although I believe only her torso is too long."

That's because the proportions are wrong. Ingres was mum on the subject, but apologists have written that he wanted to emphasize the curvature of her spine and to show detractors--such as Delacroix--that he (Ingres) was no slave to convention.

[Republicanprofessor]

I guess if you don't consider realists to be in the classical tradition, you would not include folks like Thomas Eakins or Pascal Dagnan-Bouveret?

I don't know Pascal's work, but Eakins is definitely a realist. I've never seen him called a classicist, although some of his works, like the swimming hole below, do have a classical feeling to it. He was aware of classicism, since he taught at the Penna Acad of Fine Art, but I see his work as too dark to be truly classical.