@The Pentacle Queen,
The difference between Monet and Matisse is the difference between {iston nd JS Bach. Some enjoy and can appreciate, others cannot approach.
ome of the " artistic shorthand" that is unique to specific artists is earned after a sound familiarity with the "rules".
Picasso was a superb draughtsman. His genius was the development of his own painterly language that stands him apart from other artists of his time.
I admit readily that an entire show of Picasso can get tiring as it demands so much of the viewer. Whereas camera "sub" landscapes of the Hudson River artists are meant to be scanned one at a time and in large enough halls so that the dialogue between the artist and viewer is underpinned by the surroundings.
One of the humongestest collections of Impressionist, Post Impressionist and Modern art is the BArnes Foundation. This collection is about 25 BILLION dollars worth of paintings that have appreciated beyond the Foundations capability to even sustain.
I defy anyone, passionate art lover, casual observer, to jaded "I dont know much about art but I know what I like" TYPES. I defy them all to take a tour through the Barnes Foundation and not get bored out of your skull.
Im passionate about art, I just hate vast collections and pointless comparative retrospectives (Cezanne v Picabia).
All those shows are , are just some museum director getting his or herself off on the power over taste they wield.
Whenever wwe go visit DC, (A museum day we call it) we visit ONE show in the arts at the EAst QWing, and then we go off visiting some totally different museum .
All things in moeration, even ones passionate obsession.