Art With a Capital F

Wordworker, I am so happy to see you, pull up a chair, join in.

Cav - what excellent taste! Egon Schiele is wonderful. Have you seen Rodin's drawings?

Yes, and his sculpture as well. :wink:

I went to the Rodin museum in Paris a few years ago and was absolutely amazed by his sculpture - especially where they were half rough stone block with a fluid face and and hair emerging.

His drawings are so beautifully dynamic and fluid and economical.

Schiele's are so powerful, with every line incisive and telling.

Rodin is amazing. I'm also a fan of Henry Moore.

yes, very tactile, i can't help stroking them!

Cav, I do know that thinker, personally.

I took a long look at the Last Supper, and studied each amazing face of the disciples. I must admit, although I never read the DaVinci Code, that the one on the right of Jesus, does look very feminine. Does that mean that Mary Magdalene was a disciple?

Odd the things one sees all his life only to rediscover each day. In that way, I do suppose that art is forever changing.

Hee hee. Cool! I never noticed that. Maybe they strategially avoid that in art history class because of it's controversiality. Well, I heard that a lot of information about her was later removed (during the thousands of bible edits) and that she wasn't allowed to write. I also heard that there is no biblical evidence linking Mary Magdeline to the prostitute who often accompanied Jesus.

Haven't read the DaVinci code, but of course I've heard good things about it.

Really creatively successful art is never boring. The perception that it's dated is in the eye of the beholder and is somewhat of a copout to call something datred. It may mean that one has become jaded.

Good, LW. This also applies to modernist art? I do not respond to the art of the 40s and 50s as dated. To me it remains vital.

I agree regarding the line of Schiele. Also that of Ben Shahn. The former's line is relaxed, the latter's tense. But both are very expressive.
The thing that strikes me most about the work of Schiele is that he makes beaufiful pictures of uglly bodies (mainly his self-portraits). A great accompllishment.

JL, that's also what I love about Schiele, his ability to turn ugliness into beauty, and his self-portraits are incredible.

Just reading through the last few posts, regarding the concept of 'dated' and 'religious' art, Giotto's work still entrances me, blows me away really. I think maybe Michaelangelo was his only equal in paint at least. http://www.christusrex.org/www1/francis/

Thanks, Cav,for a wonderful link. This will take some time to study--enjoyably.

The finest of the fine art really never becomes dated. It's the fad art that become dated. This is mostly the the commercial decorative art area but even then, say someone wants to recreate in their living area a historic period. If one used modern colorways and are frugal with the accessories, even perhaps throwing in a modern chair like the Barcelona, they can have a traditional looking interior that is still fresh. My favorite combo still remains a Persian rug with two Barcelona chairs and the Barcelona coffee table.

From Giotto to Cezanne was 'the' art history book for the course at school!

Yes Giotto is brilliant, absolutely radical for his time - but i love some of the old icons as well.

If you crop and close in on the figures in Botticelli they are wonderful and delicate, whereas the whole image, for my personal taste. is too cluttered and busy.

Less is more as with Schiele

I think the reason for these art trends is sort of like fashion trends in high school: people will get left behind if they don't follow them. Notice how social group behavior dictates what's "in" and "out" in terms of fashion and music - these are strong social class indicators. In similar ways, trends in art (and in academics, for that matter) follow patterns of trendiness and being "in" can garuntee - at lest temporarily - success for individuals following it (both financially and socially.)

What flabberghasts me is how few people realize/acknowledge that they are participating (often fervently) in a fad. They only look back later, like so many people upon huge bellbottoms and acid-washed jeans saying "what was I thinking?"

I'm hoping that my art enters the market at just the right time that the trends are right, or that I can pull off enough audience and influence to change the trends themselves and be successful. Of course, my art reflects my period to the extent that I am a human absorbing things and inhabiting this space and time - but I certainly wouldn't call myself a trendster. Of course, trends aren't always bad. But I am not into the current trends in art.

The current fad in the commercial print industry is a spiffy, cleaned up urban realism. Endless scenes of Paris landmarks, Venice, the Riviera, all done to appeal to those who have traveled and instead of bringing back art from the countries they visit they pick up one of these giant picture postcardsl. Some of them are well painted, perhaps as well painted as a nice ad for a travel agency. It's illustrative art and on closer inspection is not very good. The consumer won't notice because they are buying it like they are buying new dinnerware.