We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
That's a Picasso quote. For me, even his small etchings and line drawings have more soul and substance and solidity (and variety and visual surprise) than all the work of the other great artists I have seen. Every line shows strength, boldness, certainty, inevitability, regardless of whether it is etchings, lithos, oil, ink, watercolor, collage, sculpture - anything. It's called "talent."
If you're in the neighborhood, I'd advise not missing the Picasso show at the Metropolitan Museum. We got there yesterday. 300 works, all dusted off from their own mind-boggling collection. If I didn't suffer from "museum brain," I could have spent an hour just in the last room with the small etchings from the 1960s. As always, the audio guide is very good ($6, and two for one if you are a member.)
The show runs until Aug 15, and it's never crowded in August. I'd say the show is worth a special trip to NYC because it is a visual feast. For me, an overdose because just a handful of wonderful pictures fills my feeble brain to the brim.
This from his "Classical" period, 1920s.
More of my pics below the fold -
Paris studio, Cubist period (which he never entirely gave up), c 1911:
In Barcelona, c 1900:
Blind Man's Dinner (bread and wine) during his early years in Paris (no money, no chicks), c. 1904.
Then he found a hot 17 year-old girlfriend, and began selling some pictures. Thus his "pink period." Harlequin is a self-portrait:
His "high analytic Cubism" phase, c 1910:
More from then. I find just the choice and use of color astonishingly fine:
1920s, the famous Woman in White:
The bathing scene line drawings, same era. Nobody could draw a line like Picasso:
In 1939, he fled Paris to the south of France with new wife, along with previous girlfriend and her kid from him: Sheep Skull and Grapes:
Then we get into unmistakable Picasso:
Late work from the 1950s and 1960s. This is wife Jacqueline:
So is this:
One of his 1960s Musketeer etchings:
You have to see this one in person. Musketeer, girl, and guy with party hat:
Karen L. Kleinfelder, in The Artist, His Model, Her Image, His Gaze : Picasso's Pursuit of the Model, notes Picasso's sudden loss of interest in models at age 80, after years of increasing marginal porn (347 Suite eg).
Being a woman, she attributes it to his resignation to his mortality.
Being a guy, I attribute it to a neuron that stopped firing.
It is true that Picasso could draw and paint well, but he frequently chose to draw and paint utter crap.
Woman in White is the only one of these here that has any artistic merit, and even it contains mistakes (most notably, the chopped-off skull) that art students were once taught to avoid. The rest of the works would be dismissed as first-year-art-student work if it were not for the magical signature.
Just because you don't like the style doesn't make it crap...and you look like an idiot for saying it is. If you want accuracy and realism, then take a photograph- or find another painter who is into that and shut the hell up.