demagogue on 30/3/2009 at 16:28
You'd be more a fan of Friedlander, then. He was the master of spontaneous street photography and capturing the indefinable moment IMO.
Kolya on 30/3/2009 at 16:52
It's the same picture raph. The romance and magic was always something you added to it. So it's in you, not in the picture.
rachel on 30/3/2009 at 16:58
So? You can say that of virtually anything. Everything is subjective.
Besides, I explicitely said it was my own perception of the picture anyway. I fail to see your point.
It's the same picture, but it doesn't represent the same thing. To me.
Kolya on 30/3/2009 at 17:29
Nevermind. I wasn't trying to prove a point.
Thirith on 30/3/2009 at 17:58
Quote Posted by LittleFlower
I think modern art happened between 1880 and the 1950s and 1960s. After that, I think most ways to perceive and represent things in different ways have been explored. After the 1960s there was no Modern art anymore. Only post-modern art.
Interesting point, and it's made me realise something: I like a lot of postmodern literature and I think it can be enjoyed without people having to know the theory (at least if they're intelligent, open-minded readers). I find much of the postmodern visual art that I've seen... well, unfulfilling, for lack of a better word. It feels that there isn't that much beyond the initial witticism or irony. But that may be because my mind works verbally rather than visually much of the time.
Tocky on 31/3/2009 at 03:34
<a href="http://s681.photobucket.com/albums/vv174/NGCalfee/?action=view¤t=VIC29039608101Boreas-Posters.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/vv174/NGCalfee/VIC29039608101Boreas-Posters.jpg" border="0" alt="Boreas by John William Waterhouse"></a>
<a href="http://s681.photobucket.com/albums/vv174/NGCalfee/?action=view¤t=SuperStock_1158-1029Three-Women-and.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/vv174/NGCalfee/SuperStock_1158-1029Three-Women-and.jpg" border="0" alt="three women and three wolves"></a>
One day I may even learn to resize. This is my deflowering at image posting.
<a href="http://s681.photobucket.com/albums/vv174/NGCalfee/?action=view¤t=S869Christina-s-World-1948-Posters.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/vv174/NGCalfee/S869Christina-s-World-1948-Posters.jpg" border="0" alt="Christinas World by Wyeth"></a>
Scots Taffer on 31/3/2009 at 03:39
shit I haven't seen that top image in years tocky
what's it called again
Tocky on 31/3/2009 at 03:54
Christinas World by Andrew Wyeth. He died recently and I thought of making a thread but didn't know if there would be enough fans. It says so much about longing for home. As I stated earlier I didn't know she was crippled which does add something to it (she was his neighbor) but said so much without it. Women are the best works of art.
demagogue on 31/3/2009 at 04:47
Christina's World was my background on my laptop for a while at NYU. I just loved how the space of that field felt so real, like you really wanted to run towards that house; and seeing her yearn for it but being helpless heightened that feeling. When I finally went to MoMA (the museum), at the end was the painting and, not expecting it, I stood sort of stunned before it ... it was at once so familiar but still seeing it in person made a big impression.
Tocky on 31/3/2009 at 05:01
Exactly. I remember thinking the family and I would see all three of the Smithsonians art museums in one day and we spent all of it gawking in one. Still haven't seen the Hope diamond. I likely spent too much time drooling over the fountain in front of the Library of Congress as well.
Also, because I like the audacious size and because some of you doubt I do the things I say, here is young goofy me not getting down until the bobby took my pic at Trafalgar square.
Inline Image:
http://s681.photobucket.com/albums/vv174/NGCalfee/th_onalion.jpg