Colour By Numbers
I've been replying to the last few questions on painting
on Jennifer McMackon's Simpleposie site (a fave site of mine where a different question on the topic of art (or life in general) is asked each day: do feel welcomed to reply).
This series of questions took inspiration from an interesting text on the subject
of the future of painting found on Timothy Corneau's blog "Good Reads", a text that I will oblige myself responding to later (on "his site", as I'm not keen on creating a blog out of responding to other people's blogs), after I'm able to swallow his bad taste in painting.
(..;-P.... If you read the story on his site you'll understand how this comment could be interpreted as traumatically castrative!).
Coming back on artTwit, I'm gonna have to juggle a schedule between the (not that) vast amount of exhibits I see and the ones I will endeavour time to write articles about.
It would be helpful if I could acquire myself a portable.
The thing is, I do not wish to write gallery ads: a few paragraphs to entice
people for a visit. That is not my point, they are already too many people more skilled than me who can do that for you.
I'm here to rip you friendly neighbourghood art show in its parts.
I'm your next artworld's boogeyman.
I write to steal art ideas from people.
I'm a self-imposed art inquisitador.
I write as a mean to reply to artists
that never asked my opinion.
bla bla..
But definitely, returning to the painting subject, I must be having a problem if I had more fun at the BGL show in Toronto than at the closing night of Modigliani at Ago.
The only thing I will say about the Modigliani show is that the best works looked like casual "goth": bloody backgrounds, cathedral faces, and, well, you tell me if Marilyn Manson didn't
steal his look from her:
look at the eyes closely:
(....dammit...bring me a high resolution version of that image NOW!)
At any rates, a fine show about a bound-to-tragedy fellow who seemed to enjoy the company of people (especially women).
(Or Elohims.)
This said I'm gonna have to read reviews about it to find out how you can speak for hours about it. It's pretty blunt. The best insight was to learn he was in fact a neighbor to Constantin Brancusi. Donald Kuspit at Artnet speaks of a humanist reply to Picasso. But I wonder if it wasn't rather a humanist tendency at exploring a similar essentialism as Brancusi.
In the crowd I heard people arguing Modi had an eye disease and so it would explain his interest in longitude and empty orbits. Wasn't it Gauguin?
I couldn't find info about this.
The show's big conclusion was that tragedy doesn't warrant against sweetness.
Cheers,
Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com
PS: can't wait to see the film
(the picture is "Young Woman Of The People" (1918))
on Jennifer McMackon's Simpleposie site (a fave site of mine where a different question on the topic of art (or life in general) is asked each day: do feel welcomed to reply).
This series of questions took inspiration from an interesting text on the subject
of the future of painting found on Timothy Corneau's blog "Good Reads", a text that I will oblige myself responding to later (on "his site", as I'm not keen on creating a blog out of responding to other people's blogs), after I'm able to swallow his bad taste in painting.
(..;-P.... If you read the story on his site you'll understand how this comment could be interpreted as traumatically castrative!).
Coming back on artTwit, I'm gonna have to juggle a schedule between the (not that) vast amount of exhibits I see and the ones I will endeavour time to write articles about.
It would be helpful if I could acquire myself a portable.
The thing is, I do not wish to write gallery ads: a few paragraphs to entice
people for a visit. That is not my point, they are already too many people more skilled than me who can do that for you.
I'm here to rip you friendly neighbourghood art show in its parts.
I'm your next artworld's boogeyman.
I write to steal art ideas from people.
I'm a self-imposed art inquisitador.
I write as a mean to reply to artists
that never asked my opinion.
bla bla..
But definitely, returning to the painting subject, I must be having a problem if I had more fun at the BGL show in Toronto than at the closing night of Modigliani at Ago.
The only thing I will say about the Modigliani show is that the best works looked like casual "goth": bloody backgrounds, cathedral faces, and, well, you tell me if Marilyn Manson didn't
steal his look from her:
look at the eyes closely:
(....dammit...bring me a high resolution version of that image NOW!)
At any rates, a fine show about a bound-to-tragedy fellow who seemed to enjoy the company of people (especially women).
(Or Elohims.)
This said I'm gonna have to read reviews about it to find out how you can speak for hours about it. It's pretty blunt. The best insight was to learn he was in fact a neighbor to Constantin Brancusi. Donald Kuspit at Artnet speaks of a humanist reply to Picasso. But I wonder if it wasn't rather a humanist tendency at exploring a similar essentialism as Brancusi.
In the crowd I heard people arguing Modi had an eye disease and so it would explain his interest in longitude and empty orbits. Wasn't it Gauguin?
I couldn't find info about this.
The show's big conclusion was that tragedy doesn't warrant against sweetness.
Cheers,
Cedric Caspesyan
centiment@hotmail.com
PS: can't wait to see the film
(the picture is "Young Woman Of The People" (1918))
posted by Cedric at 7:05 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home