Edward Poynter Discoveries
Another artist I have had an eye out for for years is Edward Poynter (1836-1919), and I managed to find some interesting images I thought I would share with you all. One is a wonderful finished painting and the other is a study the demonstrates how thoroughly artists like Poynter understood anatomy and used that knowledge to make their paintings. No doubt David Hockney fans would claim that this proves that Poynter had an X-ray machine.
Andromeda, 1869
Study for the Fresco at St. Stephens in Dunwich, 1872-3
Andromeda, 1869
Study for the Fresco at St. Stephens in Dunwich, 1872-3
6 Comments:
The truth is that if any of those artists you claim are good had been alive today they would have explored the boundaries of esthetics. That’s why your taste is not only 'old fashioned' but decadent. You say that modern art is crap because you don’t understand it.
Art periods should not be compared but viewed as one, as one road, as history is a reflection.
Art has long evolved out of the little space of decor. It is a communication device through which civilizations are perceived. Art is not here to please your eye dear, art is here solely for itself. And for humankind, for it is an exploration.
So… if you go and claim modern art is shit, then your opinion (to mine) is that of a narrow minded child who does not understand that the world has long since passed the naive, and is rebuilding its vortex for the future.
Open your mind you asshole! Are you afraid of it (art (what else)) dripping on your shoes?
A modern artist.
By Anonymous, at 2:45 PM
I have answered these issues many times (check out the FAQ if you have not seen it yet), but I should point out the intellectual bankruptcy of your critique.
The only things you had to say aside from personal attacks and obscenity were:
Art periods should not be compared but viewed as one, as one road, as history is a reflection.and
Art has long evolved out of the little space of decor. and
It is a communication device through which civilizations are perceived. and
Art is not here to please your eye dear, art is here solely for itself. And for humankind, for it is an exploration.Aside from the self-evidently false claim that art is a communication device through which civilizations are perceived (civilizations don't make art, people do and they don't always agree or make the same kind of art as you may have noticed), the others are so vacuous as to communicate nothing of any significance. How would you prove any of them true or false?
Rather than offering any kind of evidence or argument that I am mistaken you do nothing but call me names and assert that the only reason I disagree is ignorance, as if to merely hear the case of the other side would guarantee agreement with it.
Even if you are completely right and I am...
tasteless
old-fashioned
decadent
ignorant
narrow-minded
a child
naive
backward-looking
an asshole
...that still doesn't mean that I'm the least bit wrong. That's the problem with ad hominem arguments. They don't hold any water any better on the Net than they did you you first used them on the playground.
--Brian
By Brian Yoder, at 7:50 PM
Hey again,
I would say that if anything your say about:
…the others are so vacuous as to communicate nothing of any significance. How would you prove any of them true or false?
Well that would be quite easy, for your claim that they are vacuous and communicate nothing is a matter of merely taste and of failing to bring anything further to the argument then your lack of perceptiveness. I shall demonstrate.
If you have forgotten you fascist societies are made of individuals, the same way buildings are made of bricks and windows.
Every artistic evolution that was made in the last hundred years since the collapse of the romanticism you so passionately adore was linked to every turn of our globe.
You can do the links yourself if you try.
Further more, the fact that you know the names of the modern 'masters' as well as you do, the reason they are so famous. From Andy Warhol in the beginning of what would become today’s fast media world of brands and logos to Marcel Duchamp’s ingenious ‘fountain’ that giggled at the romanticizing of art by the bourgeois and the critiques and the old fashioned.
The proof that art is communication is the simple fact that they responded to the world and were responded back, and I don’t mean in the ‘trend way’. Think about it, even you are a postmodern psyche.
Art was always about communication.
(civilizations don't make art, people do and they don't always agree or make the same kind of art as you may have noticed),
About the lack of agreeing about stuff, that is why there is such a variety of styles, and techniques, and that is fine. The fact that people don’t see eye to eye says nothing but that we all have the freedom to like what we like and that is pure postmodernism.
By Anonymous, at 10:22 AM
Shit! I just lost my comment! I checked it out in your preview, noticed a spelling mistake, hit the back arrow to correct it and it was gone! Consigned to the ether!
I can't be bothered to rewrite it all, but I will repeat my point on your newly discovered Poynter. It's too dark. Load it into XnView and twiddle the brightness, contrast and gamma controls and you'll find the chain with which poor old Andromeda is manicled to the rock. It makes the picture far more powerful. And check out Boris Vallejo's Andromeda. That's even more powerful (proving that classic figurative art, as opposed to old-fashioned "modern art", is still alive and well and doing very nicely thank you.
Regards
Ian
By Anonymous, at 5:12 AM
Oh, my God!
Please don't define art as a communication device, OK?
I am a Chinese student, and I am aware that the communists promote meaningless "art", seeing them as a "communication device" (propaganda device,to be exact). In fact, promoting meaningless "art" is a major agenda of the communists. because once people begin to see beautiful paintings, it's more difficult to brainwash them. Why? because real art can relive your soul, and a person with a soul will never accept communism. That is why the liberals promote meaning less art so much. without modern "art", it's difficult to propogate their liberalism/communism agenda in America. Picasso is a self-claimed communist and, oh my god, his paintings are really meaningless, a typical communist indeed.
You said that people like me "say that modern art is crap because you don’t understand it". trust me, I understand the modern "artists" very well. Which is the reason why I strongly reject them all.
By Anonymous, at 5:19 AM
> Oh, my God!
> Please don't define art as a
> communication device, OK?
Why not? I am certainly not saying that any old kind of communication is art, but if it is not on the whole a matter of expressing ideas (of one sort or another) then what is art for?
I think that the anonymous poster was saying something quite different from my point of view when he said that "art is communication". What I think he meant was that any kind of communication is art, no matter how pointless or unartistic it is. That's obviously wrong.
> I am a Chinese student, and I am aware
> that the communists promote meaningless
> "art", seeing them as a "communication
> device" (propaganda device,to be exact).
> In fact, promoting meaningless "art" is
> a major agenda of the communists.
> because once people begin to see
> beautiful paintings, it's more difficult
> to brainwash them. Why? because real art
> can relive your soul, and a person with
> a soul will never accept communism. That
> is why the liberals promote meaning less
> art so much. without modern "art", it's
> difficult to propogate their
> liberalism/communism agenda in America.
I think that there's a lot of truth to that. I would add that the key ingredient that they Communists and others on the Left love about meaningless art is that if you can get people to stop thinking for themselves about art, that's good practice for getting them to stop thinking for themselves about other things too. How different is it to look at a smear of paint and be told by the "experts" in art that it's a brilliant masterpiece and start parroting that official story compared to looking at a shabby house and hungry kids dressed in rags and being told by the "experts" on economics that this is a "worker's paradise"?
I'm sorry to hear that you have been suffering under Communist rule, though my impression is that things are getting a lot better in China in that respect. Would you disagree?
> Picasso is a self-claimed communist and,
> oh my god, his paintings are really
> meaningless, a typical communist indeed.
True enough.
> You said that people like me "say that
> modern art is crap because you don’t
> understand it". trust me, I understand
> the modern "artists" very well. Which is
> the reason why I strongly reject them
> all.
Same here.
--Brian
By Brian Yoder, at 2:57 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home