Where there's muck, there's Monet (Scientists study paintings to determine 19th century smog levels)

AFP ^ | Wed Aug 9, 2006

[frogjerk]

I saw this a couple weeks back in D.C. @ The National Gallery of Art.

How long will it be in DC? It's not housed there permanently, is it?

I don't know. It is still listed on their website.

[RonF]

From what I hear, Michaelangelo wasn't particularly interested in female models, if you catch my drift.

[dmz]

There are a number of posters who come onto any thread having to do with modern art, in which they express the fact that they know little to nothing about modern art, but then denounce it all as crap (or worse).

The poster known as Jeff (pinged out of courtesy) is one such poster. So much time. So little credibility.

[Mike Darancette]

The scientists believe there is strong evidence Monet faithfully rendered the London sun as he saw it at the time. In other words, the painter is unlikely to have added artistic touches when back in his studio in France in order to enhance the city's eerie "pea soup" atmosphere.

Or, maybe the paintings merely need to be cleaned.

They could use Picasso to see how Women have changed.

[presidio9]

From what I hear, Michaelangelo wasn't particularly interested in female models, if you catch my drift.

More propaganda from the buttsex community. Michelangelo had three female lovers that we know about. THe heterophobes just love outting dead people who can't defend themselves. Lincoln and Jesus? Both gay dammit!

[Jeff Chandler]

they know little to nothing about modern art, but then denounce it all as crap

If I implied that all modern art is crap, then I revise my umplication. Most. Most of what is passed off as "modern" art is crap. Maybe all, but definitely most.

Modern artistes have a good thing going, I'll admit that. Once you're a member of the vaunted precious artiste club, suckers will buy your crap for huge sums of money. The fact that modern crap is so easily faked by zoo animals doesn't even enter into the equation.

[tumblindice]

I have a print of Monet's `LeParc Monsieu, Paris' hanging in my office. And `Poppy Field' at home.
Painting is at least one thing the French do well.

[ArrogantBustard]

She may not have a face, but she's got a fantastic figure.

Baby got back ...

[Jeff Chandler]

What's an umplication?

[Jeff Chandler]

He was calling the Chagall crap but I submit that millions of people and millions of dollars say otherwise.

Which proves?? What do millions of people and millions of dollars say about Rap and Hip Hop music?

[dmz]

And I'll revise my comment as well. I may have lumped you in with a group of which you are not a member. I disagree with you, but there's nothing really wrong with that. It is unfortunate that the middle has been so colored by the extreme. The person who did piss christ, or any of the artist working in the "shock 'em" vein have overshadowed the work of some really good modern artists.

[dmz]

What's an umplication?
________

LOL. That's when a baseball umpire doesn't see the play but calls it based on what he thinks may have happened.

[tumblindice]

good read http://www.artcyclopedia.com/feature-2003-11.html
(but alla the pitchers have alreddy been colored-in)

[presidio9]

There are a number of posters who come onto any thread having to do with modern art, in which they express the fact that they know little to nothing about modern art, but then denounce it all as crap (or worse).

Have you seen the Emperor's new robe? You have to be really smart to be able to see it.

[Jeff Chandler]

And I'll revise my comment as well.

Thank you.

I just think that we need to keep a perspective about our culture. Maya Angelou is considered a modern genius by the same folks who adore Jackson Pollock.

When bad "art" is touted by the artist community as good, good art gets displaced.

I think one way to sort this out is to remove all government funding of the arts. Then fools will part with their money, but eventually the market will support actual art.

[Jeff Chandler]

Have you seen the Emperor's new robe? You have to be really smart to be able to see it.

Perfect depiction of the elite artiste.

[fish hawk]

It says that even though you and I can't stand it, there is a following and ALL the following is not idiotic. (most maybe). As far as modern art goes: I like the ones that I can tell what they are or what the artist had in mind. I do not like the ones like all yellow canvas with a thin blue line across the bottom and a black dot somewhere else. I see no talent in that kind of painting. I do love most any kind of sculpture.

[Jeff Chandler]

I think that in 1000 years, scholars will look at a large percentage of modern "art" just shake their heads.

[Jeff Chandler]

I do not like the ones like all yellow canvas with a thin blue line across the bottom and a black dot somewhere else. I see no talent in that kind of painting.

You would be looked down upon by the elite art community. Too ignorant and/or bigotted to understand, etc..

[presidio9]

Perfect depiction of the elite artiste.

I was very serious about painting in college. I won some awards and was accepted to a pretigious school of design for post graduate work. I decided to work on Wall Street because even back then I was politically conservative and I knew that a life surrounded by that community was not for me. For the most part they are all full of crap. And so is most "modern art." There are some noteworthy exceptions though. And several of the leading contemporary artists including Chuck Close and David Hockney are realists.