The Great 20th Century Art Scam!

The Art Renewal Center ^ | FR Post 4-19-2003 | F r e d R o s s

[Southack]

Goya should never have been called a Master. Painting toilets and calling them fountains is hardly art.

[AnAmericanMother]

Pyle was not only a marvelous painter, he was such a good teacher that his students were marvelous too -- some of them in my opinion surpassed him.

N.C. Wyeth is a particular favorite of mine, not only for his vigorous, beautifully composed illustrations, but for his less-known easel painting.

"One more step, Mr. Hands, and I blow out your brains."

"The Black Arrow flieth nevermore."

"Black Spruce Ledge"

[Sam Cree]

What's the title of the article on Picasso? I couldn't find it, although there's lots of stuff there that I am now going to read.

[AnAmericanMother]

Goya y Lucientes?

Good Lord, man, I'm not sure toilets had even been INVENTED when he was painting . . . . but he was a master by anyone's standards.

[Sam Cree]

Always have liked this one

[AnAmericanMother]

Yes, that one's a beauty. I've always liked his handling of sky and light. Look at the sifting sunlight in this one:

" . . . the dead are coming back again, the years are rolled away
In Sherwood, in Sherwood, about the break of day."

(That's Alfred Noyes's poem, I may not have quoted it quite correctly.)

[Sam Cree]

Actually, I am an admirer of the art of all 3 Wyeths, but tend to favor NC because I sense that the "art" world doesn't quite give him legitimacy, since he is known for illustration.

Yeah, the sunlight is beautiful on that one.

[AnAmericanMother]

There are actually more than three. I find Andrew's work too trendy and too monochromatic for my taste (how many sepia/dull gold/off white still lifes or static portraits with the subject huddled down in one corner of the painting do we really need?), although he does occasionally hit one out of the park -- like this one:

Jamie is a mordant portraitist - check out this all-too-revealing take on Andy Warhol:

But I am partial to Carolyn Wyeth, although it's hard finding her work. American Heritage magazine did an article on the Wyeth clan that featured several of her paintings, and they are arresting (and strange).

I think Winslow Homer may be my favorite American painter, though.

[laredo44]

Anyone who thinks Pollack, Rothko and DeKooning are hoaxes is an idiot.

Anyone who can explain how to appreciate The Line in Abstract would have my eternal gratitude.

[Calvin Locke]

Study one of the old master's paintings.

One's okay. A slew of "Madonna and Child"'s gets kind of old fast.

[AnAmericanMother]

One's okay. A slew of "Madonna and Child"'s gets kind of old fast.

That's O.K., lots of other stuff to choose from if you don't like the madonnas . . . what DO you like?

[Sam Cree]

I am pretty partial to "Right and Left" by Homer, an oil painting, I believe.

Way in the background, under the wing of the duck on the left, you can see the guy in the boat firing his shotgun toward the ducks (and the viewer).

[gcruse]

Anyone who thinks Pollack, Rothko and DeKooning are hoaxes is an idiot.

Another idiot checking in, here.  Monkeys can make Pollack.

[Huck]

Art, music and books have to be judged individually on their merits, not as members of some "school" or "movement" and thus automatically to be praised or desparaged.

It seems to me it is sometimes impossible to do that, or else it means willfully ignoring the relevant context of a particular work. I am not an art expert, but can we look at, say, Breton or Rimbaud without understanding the socio-political context in which it was made? Isn't that what gives it any significance at all? Some art may transcend whatever movement it was a part of, but in many cases, it seems to me, it is the school that gives it significance. Now, significance and beauty are two different things.

[vannrox]

The title of the article is "Bad Art / Good Art" by Fred Ross. You can see the article HERE. He really reams into a Picasso lover on pages 4 and 5. Check it out!

[Servant of the Nine]

... in many cases, it seems to me, it is the school that gives it significance. Now, significance and beauty are two different things.

I am afraid I one of those who denies art has any meaning other than beauty.
"Significance" is nothing but agitprop, advertising, commercial or political graphics. I won't call that art.

So9

[Wil H]

You miss my point, I am not defending 20th Century art, I'm saying that Rembrandt, or Titian, or Da Vinci are just as accomplished as Burne-Jones or Waterhouse. His focus on 19th Century artists is skewed by his interest, both asthetic and financial, in one particular genre.

[AnAmericanMother]

While Homer's seascapes are magnificent and dramatic,

I like his watercolors . . .

[freedomson]

Rembrandt, Titian, and Da Vinci aren't under attack in the art colleges and art history classes.

The article focuses on the 19th century classical painters because they are the ones who are demonized.

Am I missing something in your arguement?