[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


Why is his art so hated?
>>
Looks like kitsch
>>
>>5368523
cause it goes against the mainstream political agenda. I really like it though.
>>
>>5368539
art is a political free zone. for those who dont agree may not call themselves artists
>>
Is he hated? Or just not cared about?
>>
>>5368523
Context, context, context. This painting was made in 1904. Three years later, Picasso painted pic related, which was considered as the most important Cubist painting since it was basically a manifesto, or the beginning of Cubist art. Obviously, it didn’t come out of nowhere, since the early 1900s there were already some modernist experimentations.
He was already outdated when he was active in the 1900s according to critics and other major art collectors of his time, but his art is still nonetheless beautiful.
>>
>>5368523
The background looks too flat
>>
File: stalin_censorship_2.jpg (426 KB, 1412x1600)
426 KB
426 KB JPG
>>5368548
>art is a political free zone
>>
>>5368523
is it just me or does it have no focal point(s) i.e. it's kind of crowded and uneasy for my eyes
>>
>>5368523
why are there no shadows or highlights?
>>
>>
>>5368787
In old paintings focal points aren’t really a thing. They preferred to lead your eye all around the composition to tell a grand story, like a giant comic book. Look up any Renaissance or baroque painting and you’ll see they’re all about how one figure relates to the next, to the next, to the next, etc
>>
>>5368523
>someone actually hates that

retards' opinions are worthless
>>
>>5368523
By who? Who gives a fuck
>>
>>5368527
>kitsch
that idea itself is kitsch
>>
>>5368523
his work is awesome. The answer is this >>5368539
and has been since the modernist exclusions of the early 20th century
>>
>>5368791
Because its not an optical construction, but imaginative work. Also look at overcast days where shadows and half-tones are obliterated. Shadow does exist but it is in service of form on a very narrow value scale.
>>
>>5368787
That’s the point - it’s supposed to be a historical “vignette” for the fascinated viewer to look into from an external position and explore.
There is still a value hierarchy and composition, it’s still somewhat designed to direct the eye, and the woman is still a focal point but you also get to enjoy lavish details of the period

He did some totally different paintings of his wife or daughter - sensual, with interplay of soft edges and subordinated details, large masses and blocks, impressionistic but also with enough grist for imagination... almost on par with Sargent. but they were less popular and so he is known for his very descriptive historical tableaus
>>
>>5368527
>using a Jewish word to diminish great works
>>
In the dark haired women... how does he get that smoky atmosphere, especially in the transition between hair and skin? It’s a device I see in a fair few from the period like Leighton, Waterhouse etc
>>
>>5368593
>anon never posted pic related
>>
>>5372302
Another goyim on the list.
>>
>>5374422
Praise be
>>5372310
Small value transitions. Have you tried it for yourself?
>>
it is beautiful - is that baby Moses?
>>
>>5368523
Nah bruh shits cash. People are retarded and mostly like eithr faggy anime shit or globohomo flat drawings.
>>
>>5368523

The real life answer:

Hey guess what, it's Judeo-Marxist-Academia trying to rewrite history again-

Orientalism is considered 'problematic' in contemporary culture because it's made from a 'colonialist' (outsiders) perspective. Much of what you see in these paintings is simply invented or embellished window dressing and is not indicative of reality or true to culture... According to contemporary art historians.

In real life, you do this shit to make bomb ass paintings and sell them. People who spend big money on paintings are actually hard to impress. They look incredible at the expense of authenticity and that offends people. The problem is that most art historians are cultivated in a vacuum, isolated from the realities and authenticity of actual art making. If the artists didn't do this shit, they would fucking starve to death and their work would literally just fade away.
>>
>>5374736
So you are saying it's fanart but people take it too seriously and end up canceling artists because they can't read context? Got it.
>>
>>5374751
It's more like American romanticism if you want a closer literal comparison, but you're not wrong. There's not much evidence of artists remaining in the middle east because they simply like the place, likely because it was the shithole art historians imply it was. They just made what was hot at the time and if you ask me, Id be down to paint that subject matter because it's literally created to be "something different", hence the demand in Europe, yet i'm willing to bet there would definitely be a market for this stuff in eastern Asia right now.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.