11-30-2011, 06:14 PM
|
#29 (permalink)
|
|
Music Addict
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,381
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by blastingas10
Were some of Picasso's paintings the most technically and conventionally good? No. But there was something abstract and creative about his work that went beyond conventions. Some people would look at his art and a lot of other art, and say "what is this crap?" They are the people who lack imagination and fail to see beyond the conventional side of things.
|
Gee, that's a wonderful way to frame a debate: "The are hip people who are able to think outside of the box, and there are boorish ****s who can't - only the latter would dislike Picasso."
On that note:
Quote:
|
Evelyn Waugh occasionally ended his letters by writing "Death to Picasso." His disdain for Picasso stemmed from a premodern anti-modernism--Waugh wanted a picture to convey a clear, universal meaning. Picasso's attack on pictorial order, which was indeed significant, called into question this myth of transparency in art. And, although Waugh's criticism of Picasso's "chaos and despair" sounds prissy and dated now, he made a very prescient observation: "You can not excuse Picasso by saying it is the message of the age and at the same time deny that the age is decadent." When one looks at Picasso's modernism now from the other end, it is indeed its decadence that is most striking. We replace old myths with new myths, and Pablo Picasso, the great "creator and destroyer" of our century, created myths that are as reprehensible as the ones he destroyed. And it is with a mix of schadenfreude and surprise that one watches those myths crumble, gradually revealing the remarkable mediocrity of Picasso's achievement.
|
LINK to Zing Magazine
&
Quote:
|
Sensitive and sophisticated people, who love art and defend civilisation, now greet each other with the following exchange: ‘Death to Picasso!’ ‘And long live John Singer Sargent!’
|
LINK to Takimag
__________________
Have mercy on the poor.
|
|
|