Famous Artists

Yeah, I looked up some of the works by Twombly, and they don't seem very substantial or inspired. They look more like practice scribblings like you were looking for ideas or effects. His sculptures show a promise of depth, and some look like they're made of clay, but they turn out to be just wood or plywood and plaster. This is just my cursory opinion and, in fact, abstract art is my favorite school of art.

I haven't a favorite school of art, but I know what I like. Problem is, my perception of art was corrupted early on by Walt Disney and Norman Rockwell. Much of my favorite art is by cartoonists, such as Walt Kelly and Warren Tufts. I do love Van Gogh and at least a dozen others from varying periods and schools. Abstract I can't define, but some of it appeals to me. Some of Picasso pleases me, some offends me. I hate The Scream more than any other famous painting.

I think Munch hated the scream as much or more than anybody else, but felt compelled to paint it because that was the only way he could relate to the culture he lived in. He was surrounded by it, and the only way he could respond to it was to paint it in his awful expressionistic style. He took a vacation to an Island where he painted "The Sun," a happy painting, perhaps the only happy painting of his life.

It's like German expressionist painting. They're all angst-ridden and awful, painful depictions of the culture. Expressionistic music is the same way. Berg's operas Lulu and Wozzeck are atonal works full of nothing but depravity, pain, murder, rape, and violence.

I don't even know who painted this, but I wouldn't want to live there.

I suspect it may take several hundred years to see if a work has held up well. Much of what is presented to us today as great may be lost or ignored by then.

If a painting puts you in a crappy mood just by looking at it, then that maybe is an indication that it was the intent of the artist.

Case in point: Marcel Duchamp's installation of an upside-down urinal in an Art Exhibit with the signature R Mutt was not meant to please but was meant to be a dadaist response to the contemptible state of France which brought the insane World War One to the people. Essentially he was saying this art is what your culture deserves, and it's not even worth pissing in. You'll notice that if you did pee in it, it would run right back on to you. That was dadaism.

Politics minus art, in my view.

"The art has to make it on its own, without explanations, and it’s the same for poetry. If the poem or the painting has to be explained, then it’s a failure in communication."
Lawrence Ferlinghetti

With that in mind, and with non-contemporary art, one may need some idea of the times and context in which the art was produced. Not all art deals with Eternal subjects.

Nicoletta Tomas Caravia

Very similar in palette to Nicoletta Ciccoli who often has her fantasy work appear in modern art magazines like HIGH FRUCTOSE

I like those painting that can relief and delight people. Frequently, they are in strong color, and sometimes, they can be some fresh and cute.Just like this one: http://www.per-art.com/modern-hand-painted-original-art-oil-painting-on-canvas-landscape-wall-decor-flower-tree-no-frame-p371/

Chiura Obata (Japanese-American, 1885–1975): Setting Sun on Sacramento Valley, California, 1930. Series “World Landscape Series: America.” Color woodcut, 15-5/8 x 10-15/16 inches (39.7 x 27.8 cm). Legion of Honor, San Francisco, CA. © Chiura Obata

Why are all types of works?

1957-D No. 1