Jim, about Vermeer: He died at age 43 from a heart-attack. In 1,5 day, according to his widow he went from healthy to death. He had eleven children, and because he could not sell his own paintings or those of others (like many artists, he was an art-dealer also) he was in debt. He cold not feed his family. He was quite respected as a painter in his own time, but a lot of people had bad luck at the time, and so had he.
When I was in artschool, I wanted to be an artist, and expected to learn the things I needed to do to be one. The problem is, as I see it, it's not even the artschool's mistake. The old masters techniques are forgotten.
To be honest, I'm starting to remember why I never took part in this kind of discussions. Before you know it you start to explain and explain and explain, as the long posts in this thread prove. It doesn't make me feel any better.
There is not a side here which I can choose where I can fully identify with. I consider classical modern art (Picasso, Braque, de Chirico and others) as a valuable and necessary development, and it took talent and a lot of effort to do what people like Mondriaan and Braque did. It's what happened in the second half of the 20th century I guess where certain things went into a direction that is problematic. I think Robert Hughes put it very well in his last chapters of the books 'The shock of the new' and 'America's visions'.
And another thing...when words like 'Nazi' start to get into a discussion, I'm outta here.
Greetings,
Peter
|
Hybrid Mode
