Sign in to follow this  
random

Blue Poles?

Recommended Posts

Ok, what's the verdict. Jackson Pollock, bought by Aus for over a million 40 years ago. Now on display in London.

 

Is it any good?

 

Blue_Poles_%28Jackson_Pollock_painting%2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.3 Million..that's why it was a controversial purchase..it had to be authorized by the PM

 

Amazing painting .

Stand 15' away ..the "blue poles" leap out of the painting. Worth every cent of a million ..Valued in monetary terms it was a great investment..seeing as it will never be for sale..well..lets just say it prolly brought ordinary Australians out of the " 3 dogs playing poker" era.

Thank you Gough,

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do like a Pollock.

 

With the recent art value crash, what's it worth today?

 

from Wikipedia.....

 

Legacy[edit]

The painting has become one of the most popular exhibits in the gallery,[5] for both its value as a major work of 1950s abstract expressionism, and its significance in Australian politics and history.[3] Estimates of the painting's present value vary widely, from $20 million to $100 million,[3] but its increased value has at least shown it to have been a worthwhile purchase from a financial point of view.[4][5]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the recent art value crash, what's it worth today?

100 million.?

bear in mind,,it's huge..about 3x5 metres from memory..chopped into panels you'd get at least 5 decent pics..say 10 million a peice..even on todays market.. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

With the recent art value crash, what's it worth today?

100 million.?

bear in mind,,it's huge..about 3x5 metres from memory..chopped into panels you'd get at least 5 decent pics..say 10 million a peice..even on todays market.. :)

 

See above from wikipedia for latest value estimate

 

it's 212.1 cm × 488.9 cm (83.5 in × 192.5 in)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

46yS3kF.jpg

 

well I wasn't far off..better image for size comparison.8 poles? maybe 8 panels?

 

I'm joking

 

I don't know much about abstract..but I love this..I can see naval battles? or crows on a wire? depending on my mood and the light. ,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Single best image on this site in ga in many a moon except for cleavage. When you see one of his paintings in real life you can stand as far away as possible and then move closer and closer until you are inches from it and see new amazing stuff the entire time. This one I saw by the time you were looking at it close up what you thought were solid colors were in fact paint with metallic shiny dust partices in it or solid colors with other stuff floating in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Single best image on this site in ga in many a moon except for cleavage. When you see one of his paintings in real life you can stand as far away as possible and then move closer and closer until you are inches from it and see new amazing stuff the entire time. This one I saw by the time you were looking at it close up what you thought were solid colors were in fact paint with metallic shiny dust partices in it or solid colors with other stuff floating in it.

Ah so you've visited "lunar city" :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I dunno, looks like the paint counter at Home Depot after a three day weekend...

Looks like my garage door the day after Cinco de Mayo!

It also imitates the look of a gelcoat spray booth at the end of a double shift week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Single best image on this site in ga in many a moon except for cleavage. When you see one of his paintings in real life you can stand as far away as possible and then move closer and closer until you are inches from it and see new amazing stuff the entire time. This one I saw by the time you were looking at it close up what you thought were solid colors were in fact paint with metallic shiny dust partices in it or solid colors with other stuff floating in it.

I stared at blue poles for hours. My girlfriend said she was going. Man was she pissed when I said 'ok, see you later'.

 

It is a 'shock and awe' piece of art.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like what appears to be ( and no doubt is) carefully designed symmetry of the poles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hours..I went to the Dagas Exhibition in Melbourne a couple of months back..generally don't care for his work much..(prolly overexposure to too many bad prints in aunties lounge rooms :D) But this little statue is absolutlely beautiful in the bronze..if I hadn't had my mum and MIL with me I could have stared at it for...well at least half an hour

u0S6kLD.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hours..I went to the Dagas Exhibition in Melbourne a couple of months back..generally don't care for his work much..(prolly overexposure to too many bad prints in aunties lounge rooms :D) But this little statue is absolutlely beautiful in the bronze..if I hadn't had my mum and MIL with me I could have stared at it for...well at least half an hour

u0S6kLD.jpg

The regularity of the fundamental spelling mistakes is escalating....

Do you have a hip flask in your Librarian's desk at work?

 

Degas

 

Stereotype

 

fuck!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Single best image on this site in ga in many a moon except for cleavage. When you see one of his paintings in real life you can stand as far away as possible and then move closer and closer until you are inches from it and see new amazing stuff the entire time. This one I saw by the time you were looking at it close up what you thought were solid colors were in fact paint with metallic shiny dust partices in it or solid colors with other stuff floating in it.

 

It is a stunner.

But i do believe you are doing Mr Hobot Esq. a disservice.

 

A trip to the 'Random Picture Thread' is worth a few hours of anyone's time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hours..I went to the Dagas Exhibition in Melbourne a couple of months back..generally don't care for his work much..(prolly overexposure to too many bad prints in aunties lounge rooms :D) But this little statue is absolutlely beautiful in the bronze..if I hadn't had my mum and MIL with me I could have stared at it for...well at least half an hour

u0S6kLD.jpg

The regularity of the fundamental spelling mistakes is escalating....

Do you have a hip flask in your Librarian's desk at work?

 

Degas

 

Stereotype

 

fuck!!

 

Typing in bed, flu and tired..fuch I even cheched the spelling on wiki and still got it wrong :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I dunno, looks like the paint counter at Home Depot after a three day weekend...

 

Looks like my garage door the day after Cinco de Mayo!

 

:D

 

We're a bit slow here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Hours..I went to the Dagas Exhibition in Melbourne a couple of months back..generally don't care for his work much..(prolly overexposure to too many bad prints in aunties lounge rooms :D) But this little statue is absolutlely beautiful in the bronze..if I hadn't had my mum and MIL with me I could have stared at it for...well at least half an hour

u0S6kLD.jpg

The regularity of the fundamental spelling mistakes is escalating....

Do you have a hip flask in your Librarian's desk at work?

 

Degas

 

Stereotype

 

fuck!!

 

Typing in bed, flu and tired..fuch I even cheched the spelling on wiki and still got it wrong :D

 

 

Stay in bed until you feel better, or the damage you might do to the Dewey Decimal System could be irreparable. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Single best image on this site in ga in many a moon except for cleavage. When you see one of his paintings in real life you can stand as far away as possible and then move closer and closer until you are inches from it and see new amazing stuff the entire time. This one I saw by the time you were looking at it close up what you thought were solid colors were in fact paint with metallic shiny dust partices in it or solid colors with other stuff floating in it.

I stared at blue poles for hours. My girlfriend said she was going. Man was she pissed when I said 'ok, see you later'.

It is a 'shock and awe' piece of art.

Completely understand this. On my honeymoon at the louvre I kept going back to the sculpture gallery till I finally just stayed there for an hour while my wife wnet elsewhere. Viewing art is not a team sport for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Single best image on this site in ga in many a moon except for cleavage. When you see one of his paintings in real life you can stand as far away as possible and then move closer and closer until you are inches from it and see new amazing stuff the entire time. This one I saw by the time you were looking at it close up what you thought were solid colors were in fact paint with metallic shiny dust partices in it or solid colors with other stuff floating in it.

 

It is a stunner.

But i do believe you are doing Mr Hobot Esq. a disservice.

 

A trip to the 'Random Picture Thread' is worth a few hours of anyone's time.

You know I have not been there jn anwhile. I ususally use a crappy pad to visit here and it blows chunks loading big threadsmfull of images.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh---- those kind of poles.

 

Not my taste- classics like in the Louvere, Hermitage yes. Even coming to enjoy Dali collection here in St. Pete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pollock's pieces (like most art) need to be seen in the flesh to be appreciated. You still might not like them, but it's a totally different experience. I happen to like a lot of Pollock's work.

 

Then again, I like Ralph Steadman. . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pollock's pieces (like most art) need to be seen in the flesh to be appreciated. You still might not like them, but it's a totally different experience. I happen to like a lot of Pollock's work.

 

Then again, I like Ralph Steadman. . .

Steadman has an undeniable gift. Because he has a sense of humor, and is a little self-deprecating, art snobs don't take him seriously, but he's a visionary.

 

 

Anyone here like Mark Rothko? When I see a Pollock, I see the colors of Wyoming. When I see a Rothko, I see the world through a rainy window of an East Coast late Autumn.

 

My sister told me something about Pollock, many of his paintings are decaying, because he didn't always prime his canvases and he used house paints that had a ph balance that doesn't always get along with the canvas he chose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I like what appears to be ( and no doubt is) carefully designed symmetry of the poles.

there is no symmetry in abstract..........it just is what it is.

 

 

I don't agree. Looks to me like the poles are placed for balance and composition. Abstact expressionism does not always mean it was constructed with only chaos in mind.

 

Even the 'evenness' of the chaos would be hard to achieve. It's a big canvas, it would have taken vision and effort. As an example, look at the left and right poles, they have the opposite left and right lean in order to 'balance' and define it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was at art collage we studied Jackson Pollock for a semester. My lecturer thought that Pollock was a drunk and a womaniser and that the abstract expressionism movement gave people with little talent and drafting skills the chance to be painters. He claimed that pollock used to laugh at people who stood in front of his work and 'saw' things in his paintings. It didnt sound like he was a very nice chap. You may recall at the time a monkey was given paint and canvases and the resulting 'abstractions' were raved about by art critics until the scam was exposed.

Despite that I like blue poles (I used to have a print in my office) and I also thought it looked great in the Opera house, itself one on the ugliest structures ever built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Pollock's pieces (like most art) need to be seen in the flesh to be appreciated. You still might not like them, but it's a totally different experience. I happen to like a lot of Pollock's work.

 

Then again, I like Ralph Steadman. . .

Steadman has an undeniable gift. Because he has a sense of humor, and is a little self-deprecating, art snobs don't take him seriously, but he's a visionary.

 

 

Anyone here like Mark Rothko? When I see a Pollock, I see the colors of Wyoming. When I see a Rothko, I see the world through a rainy window of an East Coast late Autumn.

 

My sister told me something about Pollock, many of his paintings are decaying, because he didn't always prime his canvases and he used house paints that had a ph balance that doesn't always get along with the canvas he chose.

Rothko. I like the pieces I've seen. I would call them interesting. ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was at art collage we studied Jackson Pollock for a semester. My lecturer thought that Pollock was a drunk and a womaniser and that the abstract expressionism movement gave people with little talent and drafting skills the chance to be painters. He claimed that pollock used to laugh at people who stood in front of his work and 'saw' things in his paintings. It didnt sound like he was a very nice chap. You may recall at the time a monkey was given paint and canvases and the resulting 'abstractions' were raved about by art critics until the scam was exposed.

Despite that I like blue poles (I used to have a print in my office) and I also thought it looked great in the Opera house, itself one on the ugliest structures ever built.

Of course pollock laughed. There's nothing in them! The fact that random sees something in the composition proves pollack's point.

 

The ability to not put an ego into a painting was the artist's aim. The fact that mere mortals could find something was a reflection of their ego, not the artist's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to "understand" fine art to enjoy it.

You don't have to analyzi it either..Abstract stuff ?? like anything..you can like a piece or not. There's Millions and Millions of paintings in Galleries all over the world where most of the public and art critics would go Meh..move on to the next....but they are in their for some reason known only to the Directors..and fans of that piece,

Post Modernist stuff? well personally I wouldn't go out of my way to see a Warhol.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When I was at art collage we studied Jackson Pollock for a semester. My lecturer thought that Pollock was a drunk and a womaniser and that the abstract expressionism movement gave people with little talent and drafting skills the chance to be painters. He claimed that pollock used to laugh at people who stood in front of his work and 'saw' things in his paintings. It didnt sound like he was a very nice chap. You may recall at the time a monkey was given paint and canvases and the resulting 'abstractions' were raved about by art critics until the scam was exposed.

Despite that I like blue poles (I used to have a print in my office) and I also thought it looked great in the Opera house, itself one on the ugliest structures ever built.

Of course pollock laughed. There's nothing in them! The fact that random sees something in the composition proves pollack's point.

 

The ability to not put an ego into a painting was the artist's aim. The fact that mere mortals could find something was a reflection of their ego, not the artist's.

 

 

You have seen something in my words that is not there.

 

I commented on the mechanics and composition, careful placement of the poles and the even distribution of the supposedly chaotic paint colours. It would take some effort and thought to so evenly distribute those colours over such a large canvas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't remember too many saying disparaging things about the opera house, which bit? Or just all of it?

Just my opinion. It is (or was) a startling erection but from a form and practicality perspective I find it ugly. Still it has launched a thousand Japenese home movies. I would like to hear an architect's opinion. Anyone? DG are you there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

When I was at art collage we studied Jackson Pollock for a semester. My lecturer thought that Pollock was a drunk and a womaniser and that the abstract expressionism movement gave people with little talent and drafting skills the chance to be painters. He claimed that pollock used to laugh at people who stood in front of his work and 'saw' things in his paintings. It didnt sound like he was a very nice chap. You may recall at the time a monkey was given paint and canvases and the resulting 'abstractions' were raved about by art critics until the scam was exposed.

Despite that I like blue poles (I used to have a print in my office) and I also thought it looked great in the Opera house, itself one on the ugliest structures ever built.

 

Of course pollock laughed. There's nothing in them! The fact that random sees something in the composition proves pollack's point.

The ability to not put an ego into a painting was the artist's aim. The fact that mere mortals could find something was a reflection of their ego, not the artist's.

You have seen something in my words that is not there.

 

I commented on the mechanics and composition, careful placement of the poles and the even distribution of the supposedly chaotic paint colours. It would take some effort and thought to so evenly distribute those colours over such a large canvas.

Holy fuck- I agree with you! Will wonders never cease....:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You went to Art College!! That explains a lot :D

 

Friend of mine used to call the Opera House "The Bunch of Budgie Beaks" still..Could you imagine the harbour without it?

Better than our Big Bicky Barrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that he used an even number of dominant objects and makes it work I find facinating. Normally I don't like abstract pieces but I found myself looking at it longer than I expected which is kind of the point of good art in my mind.

 

And Blue poles, that could have gone so wrong, so quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that he used an even number of dominant objects and makes it work I find facinating. Normally I don't like abstract pieces but I found myself looking at it longer than I expected which is kind of the point of good art in my mind.

 

And Blue poles, that could have gone so wrong, so quick.

Yeah, no shit. Around here is a blue Pole is someone that had too much vodka and ended up face down in a snow bank in the middle of winter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The fact that he used an even number of dominant objects and makes it work I find facinating. Normally I don't like abstract pieces but I found myself looking at it longer than I expected which is kind of the point of good art in my mind.

 

And Blue poles, that could have gone so wrong, so quick.

Yeah, no shit. Around here is a blue Pole is someone that had too much vodka and ended up face down in a snow bank in the middle of winter.
Or any other nationality male, same situation, face up. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You went to Art College!! That explains a lot :D

 

 

Yes competing the first year of a fine arts degree was 3 of the best years of my life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The unkind term I heard for the Opera House was turtles fucking, I think it's great (the building that is.)

 

Better than a hideous neon casino...oops there about to do that next door aren't they ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a good thread, and the Sydney Opera House is a wonder of contemporary architecture, a sailing race captured in cement, steel and glass.

 

Also, I don't know how anyone can see "nothing" in Poles. It looks like a more accurate rendition of a high plains forest fire than any photograph I've ever seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a good thread, and the Sydney Opera House is a wonder of contemporary architecture, a sailing race captured in cement, steel and glass.

Also, I don't know how anyone can see "nothing" in Poles. It looks like a more accurate rendition of a high plains forest fire than any photograph I've ever seen.

'Contemporary'? It was designed in 1957 mike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a good thread, and the Sydney Opera House is a wonder of contemporary architecture, a sailing race captured in cement, steel and glass.

 

Also, I don't know how anyone can see "nothing" in Poles. It looks like a more accurate rendition of a high plains forest fire than any photograph I've ever seen.

It's true that Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...some people just don't have the right (left??) brain development..

 

As I said.I took my mother to the Degas exhibition ..because she said she's always liked his "Dancing Master"

 

She said rather loudly..Well..it's nice to see it ..but its not any different to mine is it!!?

 

(insert die with embarrassment smilie)

 

My dad was a hobby painter and loved perusing books on the subject...Mum?? well lets just say her favourite "painting" is Bubbles....by renoir :D

 

Some people like Paintings, some people like Golf..or even Tennis..It's all good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that he used an even number of dominant objects and makes it work I find facinating. Normally I don't like abstract pieces but I found myself looking at it longer than I expected which is kind of the point of good art in my mind.

 

And Blue poles, that could have gone so wrong, so quick.

Hey,,thats a really interesting observation..Now I'll have to spend another 15 minutes trying to figure it out.. :D

 

Got it..He's got a larger space between the two central poles..divide the painting into 3rds..still balanced .and the thinner poles are 1/3 the thickness of the fatter..and the short poles are 2/3 of the long ones .Golden mean rules!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love Blue Poles, but like all art it is so much better in real life. I was blown away by Mona at Louvre. Up close the paint is so thick it is almost 3d and those eyes do follow you around the room.

 

I also love the Sydney Opera house and I am very proud that it is a prominent feature of my footy teams jersey.

 

In fact I love all out of the box architecture. One of the best things about the UAE was their willingness to experiment with structure and shape. Speaking of left of centre buildings in Sydney what do you all think of The University of Technology Sydney's crumbled bag building?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/feb/02/frank-gehry-says-his-uts-crumpled-paper-bag-building-wont-be-repeated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My favorite art has always been marble statues. Bernini is my favorite. The Borghese Gallery in Rome has an amazing collection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without looking up the architect..Influenced by Gaudi maybe?

It's unusual but can't say Im a fan..Embarrassed to confess I don't like Gaudi either

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My favorite art has always been marble statues. Bernini is my favorite. The Borghese Gallery in Rome has an amazing collection.

Ha,,We went to rome years ago..Jimmy particulary wanted to see Bernini's David.. Borghese was closed for renovation..:( never got back there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love Blue Poles, but like all art it is so much better in real life. I was blown away by Mona at Louvre. Up close the paint is so thick it is almost 3d and those eyes do follow you around the room.

 

I also love the Sydney Opera house and I am very proud that it is a prominent feature of my footy teams jersey.

 

In fact I love all out of the box architecture. One of the best things about the UAE was their willingness to experiment with structure and shape. Speaking of left of centre buildings in Sydney what do you all think of The University of Technology Sydney's crumbled bag building?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/feb/02/frank-gehry-says-his-uts-crumpled-paper-bag-building-wont-be-repeated

The UAE has *very* interesting architecture.

 

Now if they could just keep it all from burning down. . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is a good thread, and the Sydney Opera House is a wonder of contemporary architecture, a sailing race captured in cement, steel and glass.

Also, I don't know how anyone can see "nothing" in Poles. It looks like a more accurate rendition of a high plains forest fire than any photograph I've ever seen.

'Contemporary'? It was designed in 1957 mike.

Post WWII. But okay, modernist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Art appreciation is a personal thing. The purchase of blue poles at the time was very controversial as the Whitlem government struggled to move labor away from its bogan roots and to pretend that they were something they weren't. They also appointed a poet to visit building sites to spray verse at blue collar workers. To this day the left feel a need to pretend they are all great appreciators of the arts by claiming to find great meaning in an over priced painting that looks like someone has spewed on a canvas after eating a Thai yellow curry and sponge cake with blue icing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

When I was at art collage we studied Jackson Pollock for a semester. My lecturer thought that Pollock was a drunk and a womaniser and that the abstract expressionism movement gave people with little talent and drafting skills the chance to be painters. He claimed that pollock used to laugh at people who stood in front of his work and 'saw' things in his paintings. It didnt sound like he was a very nice chap. You may recall at the time a monkey was given paint and canvases and the resulting 'abstractions' were raved about by art critics until the scam was exposed.

Despite that I like blue poles (I used to have a print in my office) and I also thought it looked great in the Opera house, itself one on the ugliest structures ever built.

Of course pollock laughed. There's nothing in them! The fact that random sees something in the composition proves pollack's point.

The ability to not put an ego into a painting was the artist's aim. The fact that mere mortals could find something was a reflection of their ego, not the artist's.

You have seen something in my words that is not there.

 

I commented on the mechanics and composition, careful placement of the poles and the even distribution of the supposedly chaotic paint colours. It would take some effort and thought to so evenly distribute those colours over such a large canvas.

Holy fuck- I agree with you! Will wonders never cease.... :)

 

 

 

Art appreciation is a personal thing. The purchase of blue poles at the time was very controversial as the Whitlem government struggled to move labor away from its bogan roots and to pretend that they were something they weren't. They also appointed a poet to visit building sites to spray verse at blue collar workers. To this day the left feel a need to pretend they are all great appreciators of the arts by claiming to find great meaning in an over priced painting that looks like someone has spewed on a canvas after eating a Thai yellow curry and sponge cake with blue icing.

Are You Bipolar? or just irrationally cantankerous this afternoon? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Brett Whiteley. I have a print of this one, 'Balcony 2'. Sydney Harbour from his place 1975.

 

See Opera House top left.

 

116.1981%23%23S.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Brett Whiteley. I have a print of this one, 'Balcony 2'. Sydney Harbour from his place 1975.

 

See Opera House top left.

 

116.1981%23%23S.jpg

I never really liked Whiteleys stuff. It is sort of like Ken Done's world seen through the eyes of a smack addict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Art appreciation is a personal thing. The purchase of blue poles at the time was very controversial as the Whitlem government struggled to move labor away from its bogan roots and to pretend that they were something they weren't. They also appointed a poet to visit building sites to spray verse at blue collar workers. To this day the left feel a need to pretend they are all great appreciators of the arts by claiming to find great meaning in an over priced painting that looks like someone has spewed on a canvas after eating a Thai yellow curry and sponge cake with blue icing.

 

Well your hero had a thing for great aussie literature. Mem fox, wasn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I like Brett Whiteley. I have a print of this one, 'Balcony 2'. Sydney Harbour from his place 1975.

 

See Opera House top left.

 

116.1981%23%23S.jpg

I never really liked Whiteleys stuff. It is sort of like Ken Done's world seen through the eyes of a smack addict.

 

 

That's because he was a smack addict who managed to live longer than Pollock, who was an alcohol addict

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

c'mon guys this is a nice thread..BTW Ken Donne on smack..perzactly :)

 

Another Australian Modernist..Arthur Boyd.

His work is so much better than whiteley but too dark to "enjoy"

 

4J4PGQ6.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

FG is no AG! Notte evan closse.

 

:)

Its alright snaggs, shes english. No need to feel sorry for the rest of us aussies.

 

You'll have to lend me Snaggy's magic de coding ring to understand that one :)

 

Ah Gaudi..sorry..It makes me think of melted rainbow icecream cake :)

 

Never been to Barcelona though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

FG is no AG! Notte evan closse.

 

:)

Its alright snaggs, shes english. No need to feel sorry for the rest of us aussies.

 

You'll have to lend me Snaggy's magic de coding ring to understand that one :)

 

Ah Gaudi..sorry..It makes me think of melted rainbow icecream cake :)

 

Never been to Barcelona though

 

Ahh yes, Barcelona, aka Gaudiville. A really pleasant, very cool city, nice local people, good food, good vibe. I wish I could find out what Gaudi was smoking, I want some too. The man definitely had an incredible imagination. You climb up the big hill to the Park Guell and BAM! Crazy, clever shit everywhere and a great view of the city to boot.

 

parc-guell.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When I was at art collage we studied Jackson Pollock for a semester. My lecturer thought that Pollock was a drunk and a womaniser and that the abstract expressionism movement gave people with little talent and drafting skills the chance to be painters. He claimed that pollock used to laugh at people who stood in front of his work and 'saw' things in his paintings. It didnt sound like he was a very nice chap. You may recall at the time a monkey was given paint and canvases and the resulting 'abstractions' were raved about by art critics until the scam was exposed.

Despite that I like blue poles (I used to have a print in my office) and I also thought it looked great in the Opera house, itself one on the ugliest structures ever built.

Of course pollock laughed. There's nothing in them! The fact that random sees something in the composition proves pollack's point.

 

The ability to not put an ego into a painting was the artist's aim. The fact that mere mortals could find something was a reflection of their ego, not the artist's.

 

Sure, there is nothing in them. On purpose. But is there something in clouds? People look at them the world over and comment on the things they see, are they actually there? Of course not, and yet, they are. Of course what you see is always a reflection of yourself, and not necessarily the artist. And yet a simple painting of a woman like The Mona Lisa gives people the same opportunity to gaze and interpret whats there behind the smile. I believe that typically people see what they are feeling, is it a determined smile, is a suppressed smile, is it contentment, is it gas... No one knows, and yet people ponder.

 

If people gazed at a piece of art and didn't see something, then it wouldn't be art.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

FG is no AG! Notte evan closse.

 

:)

Its alright snaggs, shes english. No need to feel sorry for the rest of us aussies.

 

You'll have to lend me Snaggy's magic de coding ring to understand that one :)

 

Ah Gaudi..sorry..It makes me think of melted rainbow icecream cake :)

 

Never been to Barcelona though

 

Ahh yes, Barcelona, aka Gaudiville. A really pleasant, very cool city, nice local people, good food, good vibe. I wish I could find out what Gaudi was smoking, I want some too. The man definitely had an incredible imagination. You climb up the big hill to the Park Guell and BAM! Crazy, clever shit everywhere and a great view of the city to boot.

 

parc-guell.jpg

 

So I understand...But next time I'm in spain I'll stick to Cordoba and Granada I think :)

(is that an actual Photo or something out of the new Baz Luhrmann filum? )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, there is nothing in them. On purpose. But is there something in clouds? People look at them the world over and comment on the things they see, are they actually there? Of course not, and yet, they are. Of course what you see is always a reflection of yourself, and not necessarily the artist. And yet a simple painting of a woman like The Mona Lisa gives people the same opportunity to gaze and interpret whats there behind the smile. I believe that typically people see what they are feeling, is it a determined smile, is a suppressed smile, is it contentment, is it gas... No one knows, and yet people ponder.

 

If people gazed at a piece of art and didn't see something, then it wouldn't be art.

There is definitely abstract expression where there really is "nothing" in the work other than expression and emotion. But I think Poles isn't one of those, it's impressionist, there is actual discernable subject matter there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The fact that he used an even number of dominant objects and makes it work I find facinating. Normally I don't like abstract pieces but I found myself looking at it longer than I expected which is kind of the point of good art in my mind.

 

And Blue poles, that could have gone so wrong, so quick.

Yeah, no shit. Around here is a blue Pole is someone that had too much vodka and ended up face down in a snow bank in the middle of winter.
Or any other nationality male, same situation, face up. ;)

Doesn't the too much vodka normally negate the second part of this scenario?

Just saying....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

When I was at art collage we studied Jackson Pollock for a semester. My lecturer thought that Pollock was a drunk and a womaniser and that the abstract expressionism movement gave people with little talent and drafting skills the chance to be painters. He claimed that pollock used to laugh at people who stood in front of his work and 'saw' things in his paintings. It didnt sound like he was a very nice chap. You may recall at the time a monkey was given paint and canvases and the resulting 'abstractions' were raved about by art critics until the scam was exposed.

Despite that I like blue poles (I used to have a print in my office) and I also thought it looked great in the Opera house, itself one on the ugliest structures ever built.

Of course pollock laughed. There's nothing in them! The fact that random sees something in the composition proves pollack's point.

 

The ability to not put an ego into a painting was the artist's aim. The fact that mere mortals could find something was a reflection of their ego, not the artist's.

 

Sure, there is nothing in them. On purpose. But is there something in clouds? People look at them the world over and comment on the things they see, are they actually there? Of course not, and yet, they are. Of course what you see is always a reflection of yourself, and not necessarily the artist. And yet a simple painting of a woman like The Mona Lisa gives people the same opportunity to gaze and interpret whats there behind the smile. I believe that typically people see what they are feeling, is it a determined smile, is a suppressed smile, is it contentment, is it gas... No one knows, and yet people ponder.

 

If people gazed at a piece of art and didn't see something, then it wouldn't be art.

 

 

Well put.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If people gazed at a piece of art and didn't see something, then it wouldn't be art.

 

 

If people gazed at a piece of art and didn't FEEL something, then it wouldn't be art.

 

I don't see anything in a Rothko, but I sure as hell FEEL something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites