Replies

I think the colors are muddy, the technical ability is poor, the composition is crowded, and if the artist was trying to impart the idea of motion by blurring everything, he failed. If I want so see crowded and blurred, I'll get drunk and go to Times Square on News Years Eve.

Compare this with the Sistine Chapel, and it's sheer skill, scale, and ability to render a stylized world, or Escher's renditions of carefully drafted confusion, and then let's talk about marching in lockstep to the French Impressionists. Question authority. Just who says they were any good?

Calvin and Hobbes have a great deal to say about art. It's worth reading just for that. Bill Watterson actually studied art, and delighted in shooting holes in the self-aggrandizing pomposity of "modern art".

We are talking here about the direct ancestors of the guy who urinates on a white painted floor and calls it an artistic expression of modern Capitalism, and watches a bunch of idly rich Euro-trash swoon and whip themselves into a sexual frenzy over the 'meaning'.

Sorry, I'll take Wythe and Norman Rockwell...