The Great Art Debate

[Montreal Wanderer]

Tango, your poorer classes seem to sit around smoking, eating and drinking, and doing nothing useful. No wonder they were poorer.

[TANGODANCER]

Tango, your poorer classes seem to sit around smoking, eating and drinking, and doing nothing useful. No wonder they were poorer.

The title of that is " The Peasant's Meal" Monty and if the amount of food and drink on the table is anything to go by plus the barefooted members of the group, would you be happy with that?

[thebish]

Tango, your poorer classes seem to sit around smoking, eating and drinking, and doing nothing useful. No wonder they were poorer.

The title of that is " The Peasant's Meal" Monty and if the amount of food and drink on the table is anything to go by plus the barefooted members of the group, would you be happy with that?

which Nain brother painted that one?

[TANGODANCER]

Tango, your poorer classes seem to sit around smoking, eating and drinking, and doing nothing useful. No wonder they were poorer.

The title of that is " The Peasant's Meal" Monty and if the amount of food and drink on the table is anything to go by plus the barefooted members of the group, would you be happy with that?

which Nain brother painted that one?

Not known. ( There were three of them) Apparently they didn't sign Christian names, just Le Nain.

[thebish]

Tango, your poorer classes seem to sit around smoking, eating and drinking, and doing nothing useful. No wonder they were poorer.

The title of that is " The Peasant's Meal" Monty and if the amount of food and drink on the table is anything to go by plus the barefooted members of the group, would you be happy with that?

which Nain brother painted that one?

Not known. ( There were three of them) Apparently they didn't sign Christian names, just Le Nain.

indeed - I was being mischievous!

[TANGODANCER]

Tango, your poorer classes seem to sit around smoking, eating and drinking, and doing nothing useful. No wonder they were poorer.

The title of that is " The Peasant's Meal" Monty and if the amount of food and drink on the table is anything to go by plus the barefooted members of the group, would you be happy with that?

which Nain brother painted that one?

Not known. ( There were three of them) Apparently they didn't sign Christian names, just Le Nain.

indeed - I was being mischievous!

Oh, I know. I've got Google too.

[Montreal Wanderer]

Tango, your poorer classes seem to sit around smoking, eating and drinking, and doing nothing useful. No wonder they were poorer.

The title of that is " The Peasant's Meal" Monty and if the amount of food and drink on the table is anything to go by plus the barefooted members of the group, would you be happy with that?

which Nain brother painted that one?

Not known. ( There were three of them) Apparently they didn't sign Christian names, just Le Nain.

Perhaps because many of their works were collaborations. However, scenes from peasant life were generally attributed to Louis, while Antoine did the miniatures and Mathieu specialized in portraits. Or so I read.

[Montreal Wanderer]

That's exciting really - I wonder what other early colour photographs we have of 'lost' masterpieces.

I'm amazed that you should need to ask...
this for instance (Klimt's Medicine)

Great stuff!

Any more you know of?

Any Renaissance masters?

I was actually thinking recently that a book about the greatest works we've lost would be interesting for art lovers. A combination of the treasures we know to be destroyed and those for which there is a tantalising possibility that they are still out there waiting to be discovered in an attic.

Wiki has an article on them. It should be easy to check whether colour photos exist of them such as Caravaggio's Portrait of a Lady:

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Thanks Monty, I'll read that when I get in.

Meanwhile, the image of the day has landed in my inbox.

https://www.artfinder.com/story/george- ... keys-1909/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[TANGODANCER]

Thanks Monty, I'll read that when I get in.
Meanwhile, the image of the day has landed in my inbox.
https://www.artfinder.com/story/george- ... keys-1909/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I used to be quite into drawing and painting and did things like bullfighters and flamenco, tango dancers etc in various stances, positions, situations etc. One of the most annoying questions of people seeing them was "Who's it supposed to be?" as if everything was a photograph. I'd expect to find that on the wall of some wealthy boxing promotor. Portrays the action and ferocity of boxing well enough, indeed very well, but a limited appeal sort of thing. It's so self-explanatory that it shouldn't need explanation or critique.

[Montreal Wanderer]

Thanks Monty, I'll read that when I get in.
Meanwhile, the image of the day has landed in my inbox.
https://www.artfinder.com/story/george- ... keys-1909/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I used to be quite into drawing and painting and did things like bullfighters and flamenco, tango dancers etc in various stances, positions, situations etc. One of the most annoying questions of people seeing them was "Who's it supposed to be?" as if everything was a photograph. I'd expect to find that on the wall of some wealthy boxing promotor. Portrays the action and ferocity of boxing well enough, indeed very well, but a limited appeal sort of thing. It's so self-explanatory that it shouldn't need explanation or critique.

Tbh Tango I did learn things from the write-up. For instance, I didn't know boxing in public was illegal in America (or NY State) in 1909 and one could get around it with all-male club memberships. Also that a prize fight was called a stag - it doesn't refer to the all-male audience. According to the British Museum this is a lithograph produced in 1917 so I'm a bit confused there.

[William the White]

Thanks Monty, I'll read that when I get in.

Meanwhile, the image of the day has landed in my inbox.

https://www.artfinder.com/story/george- ... keys-1909/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I joined ArtF after your first post... it's interesting in the artists it 'promotes'... But there's a surprising lack of discussion (unless I'm missing something)...

[TANGODANCER]

Thanks Monty, I'll read that when I get in.
Meanwhile, the image of the day has landed in my inbox.
https://www.artfinder.com/story/george- ... keys-1909/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I used to be quite into drawing and painting and did things like bullfighters and flamenco, tango dancers etc in various stances, positions, situations etc. One of the most annoying questions of people seeing them was "Who's it supposed to be?" as if everything was a photograph. I'd expect to find that on the wall of some wealthy boxing promotor. Portrays the action and ferocity of boxing well enough, indeed very well, but a limited appeal sort of thing. It's so self-explanatory that it shouldn't need explanation or critique.

Tbh Tango I did learn things from the write-up. For instance, I didn't know boxing in public was illegal in America (or NY State) in 1909 and one could get around it with all-male club memberships. Also that a prize fight was called a stag - it doesn't refer to the all-male audience. According to the British Museum this is a lithograph produced in 1917 so I'm a bit confused there.

All things though that you could have learned easily enough without the painting Monty or by simply reading the painter's history . Those facts are disclosed by the writer but aren't relevant to understanding the work. If you saw it on a museum wall, would it make you want to do that? Not saying it wouldn't mind, just asking.

George Bellows did a whole rake of boxing stuff.

http://tinyurl.com/aqy7pzs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Montreal Wanderer]

Thanks Monty, I'll read that when I get in.
Meanwhile, the image of the day has landed in my inbox.
https://www.artfinder.com/story/george- ... keys-1909/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I used to be quite into drawing and painting and did things like bullfighters and flamenco, tango dancers etc in various stances, positions, situations etc. One of the most annoying questions of people seeing them was "Who's it supposed to be?" as if everything was a photograph. I'd expect to find that on the wall of some wealthy boxing promotor. Portrays the action and ferocity of boxing well enough, indeed very well, but a limited appeal sort of thing. It's so self-explanatory that it shouldn't need explanation or critique.

Tbh Tango I did learn things from the write-up. For instance, I didn't know boxing in public was illegal in America (or NY State) in 1909 and one could get around it with all-male club memberships. Also that a prize fight was called a stag - it doesn't refer to the all-male audience. According to the British Museum this is a lithograph produced in 1917 so I'm a bit confused there.

All things though that you could have learned easily enough without the painting Monty or by simply reading the painter's history . Those facts are disclosed by the writer but aren't relevant to understanding the work. If you saw it on a museum wall, would it make you want to do that? Not saying it wouldn't mind, just asking.

I think understanding the background helps one appreciate a work more, though it may not be essential. For centuries people called a famous painting the Night Watch (Rembrandt didn't). It was only after it was cleaned fairly recently it was shown to be a daylight scene. I find trivial titbits of information useful. However, the explanation of those rectangles would not help me.

[Montreal Wanderer]

Thanks Monty, I'll read that when I get in.

Meanwhile, the image of the day has landed in my inbox.

https://www.artfinder.com/story/george- ... keys-1909/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I joined ArtF after your first post... it's interesting in the artists it 'promotes'... But there's a surprising lack of discussion (unless I'm missing something)...

As far as I can tell, some chap called Sharples says something and everyone else shuts up.

[Jugs]

I really like that Bellows painting and I wonder if not Francis Bacon was influenced by his depiction of violence? I myself am just about to embark on a series of pastel pieces that depict boxers in action; when you capture a frame from a fight, or flit through frames slowly, and imagine just pure shapes and forms and forget about the physical violence and the humans involved, boxing suddenly does seem quite graceful and even elegant. The shapes, when reduced to their essence, can be really something.

[TANGODANCER]

I really like that Bellows painting and I wonder if not Francis Bacon was influenced by his depiction of violence? I myself am just about to embark on a series of pastel pieces that depict boxers in action; when you capture a frame from a fight, or flit through frames slowly, and imagine just pure shapes and forms and forget about the physical violence and the humans involved, boxing suddenly does seem quite graceful and even elegant. The shapes, when reduced to their essence, can be really something.

That's a bit like practising Karate katas. All graceful moves and actions. It all changes drastically the minute they stick an opponent in front of you.

I'd be interested to see pics of your work though.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Thanks Monty, I'll read that when I get in.

Meanwhile, the image of the day has landed in my inbox.

https://www.artfinder.com/story/george- ... keys-1909/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I joined ArtF after your first post... it's interesting in the artists it 'promotes'... But there's a surprising lack of discussion (unless I'm missing something)...

Yes, I agree. I applaud the idea though, so I'll see if it gets going.

In the meantime, I'll try and move it on from the girlish gush of ignorance (and the one guy who sounds like he's swallowed an art criticism dictionary).

[thebish]

Thanks Monty, I'll read that when I get in.

Meanwhile, the image of the day has landed in my inbox.

https://www.artfinder.com/story/george- ... keys-1909/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I joined ArtF after your first post... it's interesting in the artists it 'promotes'... But there's a surprising lack of discussion (unless I'm missing something)...

I suspect that if it delivers a new pic every day - the there is no time to digest and grapple with any of them!

[Jugs]

I really like that Bellows painting and I wonder if not Francis Bacon was influenced by his depiction of violence? I myself am just about to embark on a series of pastel pieces that depict boxers in action; when you capture a frame from a fight, or flit through frames slowly, and imagine just pure shapes and forms and forget about the physical violence and the humans involved, boxing suddenly does seem quite graceful and even elegant. The shapes, when reduced to their essence, can be really something.

That's a bit like practising Karate katas. All graceful moves and actions. It all changes drastically the minute they stick an opponent in front of you.

I'd be interested to see pics of your work though.

Haha, that's why its better to be an artist than a fighter.

Sure, I'll send you a link when they're done. In the meantime, if you're at all interested in seeing what I've done so far, I have a page here:

http://ver-de-let.deviantart.com/gallery/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;