HOME | DD
aztlanwayne — Colombian Roses
Published: 2019-10-12 23:44:08 +0000 UTC; Views: 164; Favourites: 18; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
2005 acrylic on cartulinaTrying to make organic forms from lines. My obsession at the time.
Related content
Comments: 20
Thank you! I no longer have the painting. I wonder where it is today?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I think it is proudly decorating a living room somewhere!!!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I hope so! I wish I knew what happened to it. I've given away so many paintings and sold others, so who knows?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm sure your paintings have good lives!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Dear Wayne, unbelievable with lines,you can make this ❤️
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Thank you. Lines can be very organic sometimes.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Yes it is true ,
You are welcome dear ❤️
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Kandinsky wrote that putting any color next to black makes said color more vivid. One of the charms of stained glass, as you know.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Kandinsky oughta know. That's right, that is why inking makes comic 'pop.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
All my art I owe to comic books. I suppose that's true for you also.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Pretty much, with some inspiration from the great artists that all of us admire. Picasso is not one of those, for me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm glad you said that, although it's close to artistic heresy. I can think of only one Picasso painting that I like. I once bought a full-color coffee table book on Picasso and gave it away after I looked at his "art". Picasso was a successful businessman who knew how to game the art world. Joan Miró was similar in his ability to make money while not progressing in his artistic ability.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Of course, Picasso was a great, as was Miro. But neither are to my taste. Funny how Spain turns out so many great artists. I think, however, that much of Picasso's work, judged independently of his name and reputation, would be dismissed out of hand. Like Audie Murphy, he became famous because he was famous. That is not a slam at either one of those guys. I don't want to wake up to Demoiselles of Avignon everyday, or at all. I think like a lot of the art world, people are told he is great and they accept the world of a perceived expert rather than form their own opinion. Let me go further. Jackson Pollack sucks. Cleverly marketed, Pollack had no talent at all. I remember seeing a work of his entitled 'Cathedral' in Dallas as a tyke, and all I could think of was that without the title the painting meant nothing. I grew during in the pop art revolution and started my dislike of critics then because they all wrote in lockstep. Peter Max was OK, and only OK. I liked Warhol, Roy Liechtenstein, F-111, Rotozaza, and many others but none of it caught my eye like Jack Kirby did!
(The Barring-gaffner of Bagnialto (or This Year's Masterpiece)
The name of the planet where Trout's book took place was Bagnialto, and a "Barring-gaffner" there was a government official who spun a wheel of chance once a year. Citizens submitted works of art to the government, and these were given numbers, and then they were assigned cash values according to the Barring-gaffner's spins of the wheel. The viewpoint of character of the tale was not the Barring-gaffner, but a humble cobbler named Gooz. Gooz lived alone, and he painted a picture of his cat. It was the only picture he had ever painted. He took it to the Barring-gaffner, who numbered it and put it in a warehouse crammed with works of art.
The painting by Gooz had an unprecedented gush of luck on the wheel. It became worth eighteen thousand lambos, the equivalent of one billion dollars on Earth. The Barring-gaffner awarded Gooz a check for that amount, most of which was taken back at once by the tax collector. The pictire was given a place of honor in the National Gallery, and people lined up for miles for a chance to see a painting worth a billion dollars.
There was also a huge bonfire of all the paintings and statues and books and so on which the wheel had said were worthless. And then it was discovered that the wheel was rigged, and the Barring-gaffner commited suicide.)
This, I think, is the true explanation of artistic value.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Fascinating. I know nothing about Breakfast of Champions. I have read Slaughterhouse-Five and Cat's Cradle. Vonnegut is a little too profound for me.
I agree with you about Jackson Pollack, but I think Warhol is another example of someone who gamed the world of art. I now sell my paintings for $5 USD. Now that's artistic value!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You're seriously undervaluing your work. I can argue for Warhol, he was more of a phenomenon then great artist, but he sure is copied and valued. I don't read Vonnegut anymore but I loved him as a kid.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0