Iconic Paintings
M C Hamster
"iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
and where I think he went wrong.
I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
--
M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
Dana Carpender
M C Hamster wrote:
> I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
> "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
> some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
> of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
> and where I think he went wrong.
>
> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
Starry Night.
The Scream.
Rembrandt's self portrait.
Those cherubs you see everywhere.
Seurat's picture of the folks in the park.
Dana
Tony Myers (now with flavor crystals!)
Bob Ward
The picture of Lincoln that is made up of thousands of smaller
images...
The old couple in front of the barn
Anything by Norman Rockwell
Dogs playing poker
Elvis on black velveeta err velvet
Boron Elgar
<dcar...@kivanospam.net> wrote:
>
>
>M C Hamster wrote:
>
>> I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
>> "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
>> some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
>> of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
>> and where I think he went wrong.
>>
>> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
>
>Starry Night.
>
>The Scream.
>
>Rembrandt's self portrait.
Which one? There were about 90.
Boron Elgar
<davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
>I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
>"iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
>some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
>of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
>and where I think he went wrong.
>
>I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
That part of the Sistine where God is about to spark Adam's finger.
Boron
Rick B.
"M C Hamster" <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote in message
news:426fd644$0$16223$bb4e...@newscene.com...
> I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings
as
> "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I
wondered if
> some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10,
certainly)
> of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this
article
> and where I think he went wrong.
>
> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
My idea of "iconic" is something that a cartoonist can parody without
making too many readers go "Huh?" It is not necessarily the same as
Great Art.
American Gothic
Whistler's Mother
Washington Crossing the Delaware
Christina's World
That famous portrait of Henry VIII
The dogs playing poker
Warhol's soup cans
Already mentioned: The Scream and Nighthawks
Richard R. Hershberger
Warhol's soup can (alternative choice: his Marilyn Monroe)
Dali's drooping watch painting
Whistler's Mother (the second Google hit on 'whistler's mother' is
"Whistler's Mother, An American Icon" -- if Google says it, it must be
true...)
ra...@westnet.poe.com
> I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
> "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
> some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
> of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
> and where I think he went wrong.
> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
God's giving Adam the finger on the Sistine Chapel's another.
The blue boy.
Warhols Campbell's Soup
The unfinished portrait of Washington
The Scream
Stary night
Hmmm. that's all I've got right now.
John
--
Remove the dead poet to e-mail, tho CC'd posts are unwelcome.
Mean People Suck - It takes two deviations to get cool.
Ask me about joining the NRA.
ra...@westnet.poe.com
> M C Hamster <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
> > I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
> > "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
> > some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
> > of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
> > and where I think he went wrong.
> > I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
> God's giving Adam the finger on the Sistine Chapel's another.
> The blue boy.
> Warhols Campbell's Soup
> The unfinished portrait of Washington
> The Scream
> Stary night
> Hmmm. that's all I've got right now.
Oh yes, how could I have forgotten:
American Gothic,
Whistler's Mother
And Norman Rockwells self protrait.
Karen AKA Kajikit
<davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
>I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
>"iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
>some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
>of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
>and where I think he went wrong.
>
>I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
I'm not really big on art... this is what occurs to me when I think of
'famous art'.
-The Last Supper
-any of Monet's waterlillies
-The Scream
-Whistler's Mother
-the Mona Lisa (of course)
and probably unknown to anyone non-Australian, the Shearing of the
Rams, and 'Girl lost in the Bush'.
I guess I'll agree about the dogs playing poker, and Andy Warhol. It
doesn't have to be GOOD to be iconic!
~Karen aka Kajikit
Crafts, cats, and chocolate - the three essentials of life
http://www.kajikitscorner.com
*remove 'nospam' to reply
Charles Wm. Dimmick
> I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
> "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
> some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
> of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
> and where I think he went wrong.
>
> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
>
The Syndics of the Cloth Guild
The Last Supper
The Potato Eaters
El Greco's View of Toledo
Christ Driving the Money Changers out of the Temple
El Greco Driving the Money Changers out of Toledo
art...@yahoo.com
Escher's Hands drawing each other
Magritte's Bowler hat or maybe the train coming through the wall
The Last Supper
Monet's Haystacks or maybe Waterlillies
Rousseau's Sleeping Gyspy
Charles Wm. Dimmick
> and probably unknown to anyone non-Australian, the Shearing of the
> Rams, and 'Girl lost in the Bush'.
"The Shearing of the Rams" I know, partly because it showed
up on an Australian postage stamp.
I had to google on "girl lost in the Bush". Evidently, this
painting is usually just called "Lost", but unfortunately
there is another painting by McCubbin also called "Lost".
Charles
Robert Vienneau
<davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
A lot of mine have already been named.
Raphael's "School of Athens"
Picasso's "Guernica"
--
Mostly economics: <http://www.dreamscape.com/rvien/#PublicationsForFun>
r c
v s a Whether strength of body or of mind, or wisdom, or
i m p virtue, are found in proportion to the power or wealth
e a e of a man is a question fit perhaps to be discussed by
n e . slaves in the hearing of their masters, but highly
@ r c m unbecoming to reasonable and free men in search of
d o the truth. -- Rousseau
David J. Martin
>
> ra...@westnet.poe.com wrote:
> > M C Hamster <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
> > > I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
> > > "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
> > > some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
> > > of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
> > > and where I think he went wrong.
>
> > > I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
>
> > God's giving Adam the finger on the Sistine Chapel's another.
> > The blue boy.
> > Warhols Campbell's Soup
> > The unfinished portrait of Washington
> > The Scream
> > Stary night
>
> > Hmmm. that's all I've got right now.
>
> Oh yes, how could I have forgotten:
>
> American Gothic,
>
> Whistler's Mother
>
> And Norman Rockwells self protrait.
That's a pretty good start. I like Nighthawks, too, which someone else
mentioned.
How about
Botticelli's Venus on the half-shell?
Da Vinci's Last Supper.
Christina's World by Wyeth
the skull thing by Okeefe
David
incandescent blue
>
> Bob Ward wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:25:17 GMT, Dana Carpender
>> <dcar...@kivanospam.net> wrote:
>>
>> >Those cherubs you see everywhere.
Detail from the bottom of Raphael's Sistine Madonna:
http://www.lyons.co.uk/Raphael/large/sistine_madonna.jpg
>> >Seurat's picture of the folks in the park.
"Sunday on La Grande Jatte"
>> The old couple in front of the barn
Grant Wood's "American Gothic", already mentioned
>> Dogs playing poker
One of a number of paintings by C.M. Coolidge, who also
did dogs playing pool, dogs at a ballgame, dogs at a dinner-dance...
http://www.blogdogs.com/coolidge.html
> Dali's drooping watch painting
"Persistence of Vision"
http://www.art-history-online.info/images/ahom03w07/dalimemoryp.jpg
> Whistler's Mother (the second Google hit on 'whistler's mother' is
> "Whistler's Mother, An American Icon" -- if Google says it, it must be
> true...)
AKA "Arrangement in Grey and Black: Portrait of the Painter's Mother"
Hmmmm. What to add...
Leighton's "Flaming June"
http://www.paintingstogo.com/leighton/flaming_june.jpg
Jacque David's "Napoleon Crossing the St. Bernard Pass"
http://www.wga.hu/art/d/david_j/4/402david.jpg
Sargent's "Madame X"
http://www.jssgallery.org/Paintings/Madame_X.htm
Gainsborough's "The Blue Boy"
http://www.huntington.org/ArtDiv/BlueBoyPict.html
Millais's "Ophelia"
http://www.tate.org.uk/ophelia/
Dürer's last self-portrait
http://gallery.euroweb.hu/html/d/durer/1/03/1self28.html
or his "Study of Praying Hands"
http://www.artchive.com/artchive/D/durer/duerer_praying_hands.jpg.html
Edward Hicks' "Peaceable Kingdom" paintings
http://www2.gol.com/users/quakers/Hicks_Peaceable_Kingdom.htm
George Catlin's watercolor portraits of Plains Indians:
http://americanart.si.edu/collections/exhibits/catlin/highlights.html
Charlemont's "The Moorish Chief"
http://www.illusionsgallery.com/Moorish%20Chief.html
Goya's "Nude Maja"
http://museoprado.mcu.es/imajas2.html
Magritte's "The Son of Man"
http://www.atara.net/magritte/60s/son-of-man.html
Picasso's "Guernica"
http://www.mala.bc.ca/~lanes/english/hemngway/picasso/guernica.htm
or "The Dream"
http://www.mystudios.com/art/modern/picasso/picasso-dream.html
or "The Old Guitarist"
http://www.dotcalmvillage.net/nowwhatzinesep02/legacysep.html
Georgia O'Keefe's "Red Poppy" and other flower series:
http://www.thefineartcompany.co.uk/floral/floral-8.htm
Mondrian's geometric abstractions:
http://www.artchive.com/artchive/M/mondrian/mondrian_blue_plane.jpg.html
Klimt's "The Kiss"
http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/klimt/kiss/klimt.kiss.jpg
--
"I'm sorry," I say, "if I give you the impression that it's only my
mouth that's rough. I do my best to be rough all over."
Peter Hoeg, _Smilla's Sense of Snow_
Dana Carpender
Has anyone mentioned Botticelli's Birth of Venus, the one sometimes
called "Venus on the Half-Shell"?
Dana
Bermuda999
Dana Carpender wrote:
> Seurat's picture of the folks in the park.
"A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte"
Les Albert
Yes, it was mentioned. When I visited Florence a couple of years ago
I saw that painting in the Uffizi. It looks dark and grungy, as if it
hasn't been cleaned for a very long time.
Les
Blinky the Shark
> In article <426fd644$0$16223$bb4e...@newscene.com>, "M C Hamster"
><davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
>> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
> A lot of mine have already been named.
> Raphael's "School of Athens"
> Picasso's "Guernica"
I was going to mention just two, that I hadn't seen yet. You just got
"Guernica" in the last post in the thread, as I have it so far. The
other was Dali's "Persistence of Memory".
I'll add: Picasso's "Nude Descending A Staircase" and van Eyck's
"Arnolfini portrait".
--
Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
Killing all Usenet posts from Google Groups
Info: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
incandescent blue
> MC Hamster
> Escher's Hands drawing each other
Escher was more a printmaker than a painter: "Drawing Hands" was
a lithograph, and most of his famous works were lithographs or
woodcut prints.
If we don't have to stick to paint, I'd add in stuff like Hokusai's
"The Great Wave at Kanagawa" and Hiroshige's "Fifty-Three Stations of
the Tokaido" series, or Hogarth's engravings like "Gin Lane" and "Beer
Street"...
(Or maybe Hokusai's "Dream of the Fisherman's Wife", to show that the
naughty-tentacle thing is most definitely not a twentieth-century
invention...)
Blinky the Shark
> M C Hamster <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
>> I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
>> "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
>> some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
>> of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
>> and where I think he went wrong.
>> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
> God's giving Adam the finger on the Sistine Chapel's another.
> The blue boy.
This Blue Boy? ;)
http://www.blinkynet.net/stuff/leafblower.jpg
incandescent blue
>
> I'll add: Picasso's "Nude Descending A Staircase"
That was Duchamp:
http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/modern_contemporary/1950-134-59.shtml
Blinky the Shark
> On 2005-04-27, Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>> I'll add: Picasso's "Nude Descending A Staircase"
> That was Duchamp:
> http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/modern_contemporary/1950-134-59.shtml
D'oh.
Ulo Melton
<davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
>I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
>"iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
>some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
>of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
>and where I think he went wrong.
>
>I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
"Raft of the Medusa" comes to mind.
--
Ulo Melton
http://www.sewergator.com - Your Pipeline To Adventure
"Show me a man who is not afraid of being eaten by an alligator
in a sewer, and I'll show you a fool." -Roger Ebert
Ulo Melton
<cdim...@snet.net> wrote:
>I had to google on "girl lost in the Bush".
That phrase certainly does turn up some interesting sites, but I'm not
sure they could be considered high art, unless "shemale galleries free
with panties in this movie free tranny sex galleries" is some
masterpiece I'd been unaware of.
incandescent blue
> incandescent blue wrote:
>> On 2005-04-27, Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>>> I'll add: Picasso's "Nude Descending A Staircase"
>
>> That was Duchamp:
>> http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/modern_contemporary/1950-134-59.shtml
>
> D'oh.
Eh, those Cubist models all looked alike, anyway!
http://zippythepinhead.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/2004/images/071604.gif
A. "It's as if Immanuel Kant & Marcel Duchamp decided to open a hash house!"
huey.c...@gmail.com
> "Charles Wm. Dimmick" <cdim...@snet.net> wrote:
> > I had to google on "girl lost in the Bush".
> That phrase certainly does turn up some interesting sites, but I'm
> not sure they could be considered high art, unless "shemale
> galleries free with panties in this movie free tranny sex galleries"
> is some masterpiece I'd been unaware of.
Well, have you seen it?
--
Huey
Ulo Melton
Nah, I'm a phuckin' philistine.
Karen AKA Kajikit
<melt...@sewergator.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 19:49:26 GMT, "Charles Wm. Dimmick"
><cdim...@snet.net> wrote:
>
>>I had to google on "girl lost in the Bush".
>
>That phrase certainly does turn up some interesting sites, but I'm not
>sure they could be considered high art, unless "shemale galleries free
>with panties in this movie free tranny sex galleries" is some
>masterpiece I'd been unaware of.
Ewwwwwwwwwwww! Well, that's not what I had in mind :P
Try this one - the actual name is 'Lost by Frederick McCubbin
http://www.ngv.vic.gov.au/collection/australian/painting/m/mccubbin_f/education_kit.html
Mark Steese
news:426fd644$0$16223$bb4e...@newscene.com:
> I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
> "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered
> if some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10,
> certainly) of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned
> in this article and where I think he went wrong.
>
> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
You know the word iconic has been overused to the point of meaninglessness
when people start applying it without irony to paintings other than icons.
--
Mark Steese
===========
The first signs of the death of the boom came in the summer,
early, and everything went like snow in the sun.
Out of their office windows. There was miasma,
a weight beyond enduring, the city reeked of failure.
Boron Elgar
wrote:
It looked that way 30 years ago, too.
Boron
groo
news:hlnv61ls26pvifaj0...@4ax.com:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:25:17 GMT, Dana Carpender
> <dcar...@kivanospam.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>M C Hamster wrote:
>>
>>> I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings
>>> as "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I
>>> wondered if some of you might make a relatively short list (no more
>>> than 10, certainly) of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he
>>> mentioned in this article and where I think he went wrong.
>>>
>>> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
>>
>>Starry Night.
>>
>>The Scream.
>>
>>Rembrandt's self portrait.
>
> Which one? There were about 90.
>
And I would consider "The Bedroom" more iconic.
http://www.artic.edu/artaccess/AA_Impressionist/pages/IMP_8.shtml
--
"I tried being patient, but it took too long." - Anya, BtVS
groo
news:Xns9645ACF2...@130.133.1.4:
> You know the word iconic has been overused to the point of
> meaninglessness when people start applying it without irony to
> paintings other than icons.
Would paintings of icons make you happy?
I would think that just about the only type of object that could not be
called "iconic" is an actual icon. Isn't that kind of like calling an
actual clown "clown-like"?
Bob Ward
How about Bo Duke driving the Charger out of the barnyard?
Bill Van
groo <gr...@groo.org> wrote:
> Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:Xns9645ACF2...@130.133.1.4:
>
> > You know the word iconic has been overused to the point of
> > meaninglessness when people start applying it without irony to
> > paintings other than icons.
>
> Would paintings of icons make you happy?
>
>
> I would think that just about the only type of object that could not be
> called "iconic" is an actual icon. Isn't that kind of like calling an
> actual clown "clown-like"?
This one's pretty iconic, notwithstanding the demonic look on the baby
Jesus.
http://www.abcgallery.com/I/icons/icons6.html
bill
John Hatpin
In Lincoln Cathedral (Lincolnshire, UK), there's a sort of icon which
is actually a ceiling boss.
It depicts Christ's ascension into Heaven, and unfortunately it's not
online. Let's just say there's a crowd of people looking upwards near
the bottom, and at the top you see the hem of a gown with a pair of
feet sticking out of it. That's Jesus on his way up. Hilariously
bad, and (IIRC) 17th Century.
--
John Hatpin
Dhubghall
> > Dali's drooping watch painting
> "Persistence of Vision"
> http://www.art-history-online.info/images/ahom03w07/dalimemoryp.jpg
Sorry minor nit. It is actually "Persistance of Memory"
Which he later remodeled as "The Disintegration of the Persistance of
Memory" and seems to be somwhat less iconic.
> Georgia O'Keefe's "Red Poppy" and other flower series:
> http://www.thefineartcompany.co.uk/floral/floral-8.htm
And her skull series. They seem to be pretty iconic in the southwest at
least. Between her and Amado Pena it's hard not to see one in a bank
lobby or fast food place.
Dougall
Dhubghall
> On 2005-04-27, Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
> > incandescent blue wrote:
> >> On 2005-04-27, Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
> >>> I'll add: Picasso's "Nude Descending A Staircase"
> >
> >> That was Duchamp:
> >> http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/modern_contemporary/1950-134-59.shtml
> >
> > D'oh.
> Eh, those Cubist models all looked alike, anyway!
> http://zippythepinhead.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/2004/images/071604.gif
> A. "It's as if Immanuel Kant & Marcel Duchamp decided to open a hash house!"
Somewhere I have a humor book called "The Book of Sequals". It has a
section called sequals to famous art and has Duchamp's "Nude re-ascending
the staircase". They also have "The Arnolfini's divorce" that is a scream
as well. The detail of the parody is almost as deep as the detail in the
original.
Dougall
Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer)
<die-bla...@hyacinthine.net> wrote:
A whole list of great paintings, all by Europeans.
I'd add that Japanese wave. Let's see, it's "In the Well of the Great
Wave of Kanagawa", Hokusai.
Mary
--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer
reunite....@gmail.com or mil...@qnet.com
K_S_ONeill
incandescent blue wrote:
>
> Jacque David's "Napoleon Crossing the St. Bernard Pass"
> http://www.wga.hu/art/d/david_j/4/402david.jpg
I could have sworn that was a teddy bear...
Kevin
Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer)
wrote:
> My idea of "iconic" is something that a cartoonist can parody without
> making too many readers go "Huh?" It is not necessarily the same as
> Great Art.
>
> American Gothic
>
> Whistler's Mother
>
> Washington Crossing the Delaware
>
> Christina's World
>
> That famous portrait of Henry VIII
>
> The dogs playing poker
>
> Warhol's soup cans
>
> Already mentioned: The Scream and Nighthawks
The Great Wave (Japanese)
The Sistine Chapel ceiling, particularly Adam and God nearly touching
fingertips
While not paintings, but sculpture, there's The Pieta, David, The
Thinker, Laocoon and His Sons, Nike, and Atlas.
Dana Carpender
Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer) wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 15:04:52 -0400, "Rick B." <deep...@my-deja.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>My idea of "iconic" is something that a cartoonist can parody without
>>making too many readers go "Huh?" It is not necessarily the same as
>>Great Art.
>>
>>American Gothic
>>
>>Whistler's Mother
>>
>>Washington Crossing the Delaware
>>
>>Christina's World
>>
>>That famous portrait of Henry VIII
>>
>>The dogs playing poker
>>
>>Warhol's soup cans
>>
>>Already mentioned: The Scream and Nighthawks
>
>
> The Great Wave (Japanese)
>
> The Sistine Chapel ceiling, particularly Adam and God nearly touching
> fingertips
>
> While not paintings, but sculpture, there's The Pieta, David, The
> Thinker, Laocoon and His Sons, Nike, and Atlas.
And the Venus de Milo. Not to mention the head of Nefertiti.
Oh, and another sketch -- Hands of the Apostle, often just called
"Praying Hands."
Dana
Bob Ward
<can...@thelast.mile> wrote:
>
>Yeah, and those waves breaking over rocks that I've seen in more than
>a few early 70's living rooms..
That one was a paint-by-numbers kit - we have one that my
mother-in-law painted from that kit back in the 50's - and she was
certainly no Grandma Moses...
Blinky the Shark
> The Sistine Chapel ceiling, particularly Adam and God nearly touching
> fingertips
It was more fun before M. changed his mind and painted over the speech
balloon that said "Pull my finger."
S. Checker
> On 2005-04-27, Richard R. Hershberger <rrh...@acme.com> wrote:
> Hmmmm. What to add...
>
> Leighton's "Flaming June"
> http://www.paintingstogo.com/leighton/flaming_june.jpg
Huh. Lovely picture but I'd never seen it before. Not iconic for me.
>
> Jacque David's "Napoleon Crossing the St. Bernard Pass"
> http://www.wga.hu/art/d/david_j/4/402david.jpg
>
> Sargent's "Madame X"
> http://www.jssgallery.org/Paintings/Madame_X.htm
>
Not as sure that everyone would recognize it.
> Gainsborough's "The Blue Boy"
> http://www.huntington.org/ArtDiv/BlueBoyPict.html
Absolutely.
>
> Millais's "Ophelia"
> http://www.tate.org.uk/ophelia/
>
Was that a take on the "The Band" song?
<big snip>
> Goya's "Nude Maja"
> http://museoprado.mcu.es/imajas2.html
>
> Magritte's "The Son of Man"
> http://www.atara.net/magritte/60s/son-of-man.html
>
> Picasso's "Guernica"
> http://www.mala.bc.ca/~lanes/english/hemngway/picasso/guernica.htm
>
I don't know that Maja Desnuda or Guernica would be known by someone who
hasn't spent at least a little time in museums. They certainly have not
been copied and reproduced as widely as "The Son of Man."
The only thing I can add to this is the Degas dancers. A cartoonist
could put Bush, Rice, and Rumsfeld's faces on
http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/degas/ballet/degas.dance-opera.jpg
and I'm pretty sure most people would get the reference.
--
"Man, those Samoans are a surly bunch" - M. Mead
Dr H
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Boron Elgar vociferated:
}On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:25:17 GMT, Dana Carpender
}<dcar...@kivanospam.net> wrote:
}
}>
}>
}>M C Hamster wrote:
}>
}>> I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
}>> "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
}>> some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
}>> of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
}>> and where I think he went wrong.
}>>
}>> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
}>
}>Starry Night.
}>
}>The Scream.
}>
}>Rembrandt's self portrait.
}
}Which one? There were about 90.
The nude, where his back's to the canvas.
Dr H
Dr H
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, M C Hamster vociferated:
}I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
}"iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
}some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
}of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
}and where I think he went wrong.
}
}I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
Rauchenberg's White Paintings. Take you pick.
Dr H
D.F. Manno
incandescent blue <die-bla...@hyacinthine.net> wrote:
> On 2005-04-27, Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > I'll add: Picasso's "Nude Descending A Staircase"
>
> That was Duchamp:
> http://www.philamuseum.org/collections/modern_contemporary/1950-134-59.shtml
My favorite Duchamp is "The Bride Stripped Bare By Her Bachelors, Even."
I worked in the Philadelphia Museum of Art during the bicentennial
summer, and spent a week telling visitors not to touch the glass.
Too bad about the cracks, though.
--
D.F. Manno
dfm2a...@spymac.com
"The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dream
will never die."
Blinky the Shark
> My favorite Duchamp is "The Bride Stripped Bare By Her Bachelors, Even."
> I worked in the Philadelphia Museum of Art during the bicentennial
> summer, and spent a week telling visitors not to touch the glass.
> Too bad about the cracks, though.
If that were a cubist work, the bride's cracks could turn up anywhere.
Mark Steese
64.164.98.6:
> Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:Xns9645ACF2...@130.133.1.4:
>
>> You know the word iconic has been overused to the point of
>> meaninglessness when people start applying it without irony to
>> paintings other than icons.
>
> Would paintings of icons make you happy?
Paintings of paintings? Round, like a circle in a spiral, like a wheel
within a wheel...
> I would think that just about the only type of object that could not be
> called "iconic" is an actual icon. Isn't that kind of like calling an
> actual clown "clown-like"?
Iconic, adj. 1: of, relating to, or having the character of an icon.
(Webster's Third fails to provide a definition of "clown-like.")
What is it about the non-icon paintings mentioned in this thread that seems
iconic about them to you?
Mark Steese
news:slrnd72967....@thurston.blinkynet.net:
> Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer) wrote:
>
>> The Sistine Chapel ceiling, particularly Adam and God nearly touching
>> fingertips
>
> It was more fun before M. changed his mind and painted over the speech
> balloon that said "Pull my finger."
He couldn't figure out why nobody laughed. Then, right after he painted
over it, he realized that he should have written "Tiri la mia barretta."
--
Mark Steese
Non vada a letto con un prezzo sulla vostra testa
groo
> groo <gr...@groo.org> wrote in
> news:Xns9645DF5955E42944818cac31cddd2466d@ 64.164.98.6:
>
>> Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:Xns9645ACF2...@130.133.1.4:
>>
>>> You know the word iconic has been overused to the point of
>>> meaninglessness when people start applying it without irony to
>>> paintings other than icons.
>>
>> Would paintings of icons make you happy?
>
> Paintings of paintings? Round, like a circle in a spiral, like a wheel
> within a wheel...
>
I'm pretty sure I've seen paintings which include icons as part of the
subject matter. Not the main subject matter, but just there in the room
too. I can't cite any examples, though. You will just have to choose
whether or not to believe me. Or I guess you could also choose to not
choose to either believe or disbelieve me. You could be grooagnostic.
>> I would think that just about the only type of object that could not
>> be called "iconic" is an actual icon. Isn't that kind of like calling
>> an actual clown "clown-like"?
>
> Iconic, adj. 1: of, relating to, or having the character of an icon.
> (Webster's Third fails to provide a definition of "clown-like.")
>
> What is it about the non-icon paintings mentioned in this thread that
> seems iconic about them to you?
What is it about my statement that makes you think that is the case?
I merely pointed out that icons should be somewhat exempt from being
considered iconic, since it seems a bit redundant to say that an icon has
the character of an icon. Kind of like calling rocks rocky, innit?
incandescent blue
That Napoleon was riding something with more toes and horns
than your average horse.
A. "Hey, hoka!"
--
"I'm sorry," I say, "if I give you the impression that it's only my
mouth that's rough. I do my best to be rough all over."
Peter Hoeg, _Smilla's Sense of Snow_
incandescent blue
> On 27 Apr 2005 21:12:50 GMT, incandescent blue
><die-bla...@hyacinthine.net> wrote:
> A whole list of great paintings, all by Europeans.
That's because the original thread specified "paintings".
I've seen some lovely Japanese and Chinese paintings, but
for sheer iconic value my first suggestions for Asian art would have
been prints and sculpture, which weren't included in the original
poster's query. I was just trying to stick within that framework --
if I'd been listing sculpture and prints as well, that list
've been a heckuva lot longer.
> I'd add that Japanese wave. Let's see, it's "In the Well of the Great
> Wave of Kanagawa", Hokusai.
Woodblock print, not a painting.
And I mentioned it yesterday once somebody else expanded this to prints:
Message-ID: <slrnd701up.1sfc...@sidehack.sat.gweep.net>
...along with another, somewhat naughtier Hokusai print, and a
very influential landscape series by Hiroshige. If we're lumping
sculpture in as well, I'd throw in Emperor Qin's terracotta army,
and the Great Buddha of Kamakura, and the Han dynasty bronze of
the flying horse...
(And Sargent, Hicks, Catlin, and O'Keefe were all Americans, btw.)
Hank Gillette
> A whole list of great paintings, all by Europeans.
I'm surprised that no one (as far as I know) mention the Gilbert Stuart
painting of George Washington that was used for the dollar bill.
--
Hank Gillette
Bill Van
John Hatpin <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> In Lincoln Cathedral (Lincolnshire, UK), there's a sort of icon which
> is actually a ceiling boss.
>
> It depicts Christ's ascension into Heaven, and unfortunately it's not
> online. Let's just say there's a crowd of people looking upwards near
> the bottom, and at the top you see the hem of a gown with a pair of
> feet sticking out of it. That's Jesus on his way up. Hilariously
> bad, and (IIRC) 17th Century.
Chalk it up to Henry VIII. In the Low Countries, my ancestors got rather
more hands-on with the Catholic church. They put on some terrific
iconoclasms (that said iconoclams before I fixed it) in the 16th
century, and much of the bad art went out the windows. Along with the
good, of course.
bill
Robert Vienneau
<gr...@groo.org> wrote:
> Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:Xns9646AB17...@130.133.1.4:
>
> > groo <gr...@groo.org> wrote in
> > news:Xns9645DF5955E42944818cac31cddd2466d@ 64.164.98.6:
> >
> >> Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> >> news:Xns9645ACF2...@130.133.1.4:
> >>
> >>> You know the word iconic has been overused to the point of
> >>> meaninglessness when people start applying it without irony to
> >>> paintings other than icons.
> >> Would paintings of icons make you happy?
> > Paintings of paintings? Round, like a circle in a spiral, like a wheel
> > within a wheel...
> I'm pretty sure I've seen paintings which include icons as part of the
> subject matter. Not the main subject matter, but just there in the room
> too. I can't cite any examples, though. You will just have to choose
> whether or not to believe me. Or I guess you could also choose to not
> choose to either believe or disbelieve me. You could be grooagnostic.
Could there be icons in some of Marc Chagall's paintings? I cannot
remember any off-hand.
--
Mostly economics: <http://www.dreamscape.com/rvien/#PublicationsForFun>
r c
v s a Whether strength of body or of mind, or wisdom, or
i m p virtue, are found in proportion to the power or wealth
e a e of a man is a question fit perhaps to be discussed by
n e . slaves in the hearing of their masters, but highly
@ r c m unbecoming to reasonable and free men in search of
d o the truth. -- Rousseau
M C Hamster
want to print out a copy for your files) is my compilation of these. The
number in parentheses is the number of times it was mentioned.
The reason I asked y'all to do this was that I was reading an article in the
Chicago Tribune which was bragging about our local art museum, and it said
that we had a large collection of those few paintings that can be called,
uh, "iconic" (I don't remember what term they used, but they meant famous,
often parodied, etc. etc.). The ones he cited were "Nighthawks", "American
Gothic", and Seurat's "Grande Jatte". I was dubious whether Nighthawks or
Grande Jatte should be considered in that category, but they were quickly
mentioned in this thread so I'm confident they should and that it isn't
merely self-serving to call those "iconic". There were two others in the
Chicago Art Institute that at least one of you mentioned (Picasso's "Old
Guitarist" and Magritte's "Time Transfixed", i.e., the train coming out of
the wall), making 5 in all. In addition, there are three cases where the
Chicago Art Institute has one of several paintings of a series (Monet's
Waterlilies, van Gogh's bedroom, and Monet's Haystacks) but I didn't tally
multiples in the other museums, so this is padding things somewhat. (I could
though have also included our Mondrian geometric, Degas dancer painting,
Rembrandt self- portrait...)
Of all the paintings listed, the Met in New York wins the game, owning the
largest number, 6. That oh-so-famous art museum in Paris (snicker) has but
two, those quiche-eating losers. And where the hell is London in this,
anyway? If you hadn't stolen the Elgins, you guys would really be bereft,
wouldn't you. You do have three art museums with one each, though. (Plus
the Lincoln Cathedral.)
Thanks for helping me out with my little project here. I'm kinda excited
being able to see 5 (or 8) of this relatively exclusive set of world-famed
paintings in our little museum here.
****
THE MUSEUMS WITH THE MOST ICONIC PAINTINGS
Metropolitan Museum of Art - 6 (Sargent's "Madame X", Georgia O'Keefe's "Red
Poppy", Georgia O'Keefe's skull, Hokusai's "In the Well of the Great Wave of
Kanagawa", Leutze's "Washington Crossing the Delaware", and El Greco's "View
of Toledo")
Art Institute of Chicago - 5 (+ 3 when including multiple versions) -
Hopper's "Nighthawks", Seurat's "Sunday Afternoon at the Grande Jatte",
Wood's "American Gothic", Picasso's "Old Guitarist", and Magritte's "Time
Transfixed". (Plus Monet's "Waterlilies, van Gogh's "Bedroom at Arles", and
Monet's "Haystacks".)
MOMA - 5 (van Gogh's "Starry Night", Warhol's "Campbells Soup Can", Dali's
"Persistence of Memory", Wyeth's "Christina's World", and Rousseau's
"Sleeping Gypsy")
Smithsonian - 2 (Stuart's Washington Portrait and Catlin's Plains Indians)
Philadelphia Museum of Art - 2 (Charlemont's "The Moorish Chief" and
Duchamp's "Nude Descending a Stairway")
Louvre - 2 (da Vinci's "Mona Lisa" and Gericault's "Raft of the Medusa")
Vatican - 2 (Michelangelo's "Sistine Chapel" and Raphael's "School of
Athens")
Many tied with 1
****
THE ICONIC PAINTINGS
Mona Lisa (da Vinci) (2) (Louvre)
Nighthawks (Hopper) (3) (Art Institute of Chicago)
Starry Night (van Gogh) (2) (MOMA)
The Scream (Munch) (4) (AFAIK it's still missing. Oslo Museum normally)
Rembrandt's Self Portrait (Rembrandt) (too many to mention)
A Sunday Afternoon on the Grande Jatte (Seurat) (Art Institute of Chicago)
Picture of Lincoln made of smaller images (?)
American Gothic (Wood) (3) (Art Institute of Chicago)
Dogs Playing Poker (Coolidge) (3) (don't know)
Elvis on black velvet (don't know)
Warhol's Soup Can (Warhol) (4) (MOMA)
Persistence of Memory (drooping watches) (Dali) (2) (MOMA)
Whistler's Mother (Whistler) (4) (Musee d'Orsay)
Sistine Madonna (Raphael) (Dresden Gallery)
Leighton's "Flaming June" (don't know)
Jacque David's "Napoleon Crossing the St. Bernard Pass" (don't know)
Sargent's "Madame X" (Metropolitan Museum, New York)
Gainsborough's "The Blue Boy" (2) (Huntington Library)
Millais's "Ophelia" (Tate Gallery)
Dürer's last self-portrait (several. most famous in Alte Pinakothek, Munich)
Durer's "Study of Praying Hands" (Graphische Sammlung Albertina, Vienna)
Edward Hicks' "Peaceable Kingdom" paintings (Worcester Art Museum)
George Catlin's watercolor portraits of Plains Indians (Smithsonian)
Charlemont's "The Moorish Chief" (Philadelphia Museum of Art)
Goya's "Nude Maja" (Prado, Madrid)
Magritte's "The Son of Man" (don't know)
Picasso's "Guernica" (3) (Reina Sofia Art Center, Madrid)
Picasso's "The Dream" (Private collection)
Picasso's "The Old Guitarist" (Art Institute of Chicago)
Georgia O'Keefe's "Red Poppy" and other flower series: (Metropolitan Museum
of Art, New York)
Georgia O'Keefe's skull series (2) (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)
Mondrian's geometric abstractions: (multiple)
Klimt's "The Kiss" (Österreichisches Galerie Wien, Vienna)
Botticelli's Birth of Venus (2) (Galleria degli Uffizi in Florence)
In the Well of the Great Wave of Kanagawa (Hokusai) (4) (Metropolitan Museum
of Art, New York)
Dancers (Degas) (multiple)
Washington Crossing the Delaware (Leutze) (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New
York)
Christina's World (Wyeth) (2) (MOMA)
Portrait of Henry VIII (multiple - maybe National Portrait Gallery, London)
Sistine Chapel - Adam and God (Michelangelo) (2) (Sistine Chapel, Vatican)
Washington portrait (Gilbert Stuart) - Smithsonian
Norman Rockwell's Self Portrait (Rockwell) (Rockwell Museum, Stockbridge MA)
Last Supper (da Vinci) (4) (Convent of Santa Maria delle Grazie Refectory,
Milan)
Waterlilies (Monet) (2) (multiple, one in Art Institute of Chicago)
Shearing of the Rams (McCubbin) (don't know)
Girl Lost in the Bush/Lost (McCubbin) (Felton Bequest)
Hands (Escher) (print - many)
Bowler hat (Magritte) (not sure. print has many locations)
"Time Transfixed"/Train coming through wall (Magritte) (Art Institute of
Chicago)
Haystacks (Monet) (multiple locations. one in Art Institute of Chicago)
Sleeping Gypsy (Rousseau) (MOMA)
53 Stations of the Tokaido (Hiroshige) (woodblock prints - multiple)
Syndics of the Cloth Guild (Rembrandt) (Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam)
The Potato Eaters (van Gogh) (van Gogh Museum, Amsterdam)
View of Toledo (El Greco) (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)
Christ Driving the Money Changers out of the Temple (El Greco) Institute of
Arts, Minneapolis
School of Athens (Raphael) (Stanza della Segnatura, Vatican Museum)
Nude Descending a Stairway (Duchamp) (Philadelphia Museum of Art)
Arnolfini Portrait (van Eyck) (National Gallery, London)
Raft of the Medusa (Gericault) (Louvre)
Lincoln Cathedral Christ Ascension into Heaven (Lincoln Cathedral, Lincs UK)
Bedroom at Arles (van Gogh) (multiple, one in Art Institute of Chicago)
White Paintings (Rauchenberg) (multiple)
****
M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
incandescent blue
> incandescent blue <die-bla...@hyacinthine.net> wrote:
>> Leighton's "Flaming June"
>> http://www.paintingstogo.com/leighton/flaming_june.jpg
> Huh. Lovely picture but I'd never seen it before. Not iconic for me.
Leighton himself was more of a classicist, but that particular piece
often tends to get lumped in with the Pre-Raphaelites, enough so that
it turns up on calendars and posters and such right alongside all the
Burne-Jones and Rosetti stuff.
>> Sargent's "Madame X"
>> http://www.jssgallery.org/Paintings/Madame_X.htm
>>
> Not as sure that everyone would recognize it.
I had the pleasure of seeing both this and "Flaming June" at an
exhibit in the National Gallery of Art. a few years ago. In spite of
long familiarity with both from books, webpages, etc., I just wasn't
prepared for the impact of seeing the originals up close like that.
> I don't know that Maja Desnuda or Guernica would be known by someone who
> hasn't spent at least a little time in museums.
Guilty as charged, although I'd venture that looking through books
(or websites) can work almost as well as gallery-hopping.
Art books certainly did the trick for me as a child -- the only
general art museum in the state had, unsurprisingly, an exceptional
collection of Asian art, but their European and American collections
weren't quite as mind-blowing...many great painters, but mostly their
lesser-known works. Art books let me grow familiar with stuff beyond
what was viewable close to home.
M C Hamster
news:hankgillette-4EF8...@comcast.dca.giganews.com...
Actually someone did mention it.
--
M C Hamster
news:rvien-BF4F0B....@news.dreamscape.com...
> In article <Xns9646B00A2B9A294...@64.164.98.6>, groo
> <gr...@groo.org> wrote:
>
>> Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:Xns9646AB17...@130.133.1.4:
>>
>> > groo <gr...@groo.org> wrote in
>> > news:Xns9645DF5955E42944818cac31cddd2466d@ 64.164.98.6:
>> >
>> >> Mark Steese <mark_...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> >> news:Xns9645ACF2...@130.133.1.4:
>> >>
>> >>> You know the word iconic has been overused to the point of
>> >>> meaninglessness when people start applying it without irony to
>> >>> paintings other than icons.
>
>> >> Would paintings of icons make you happy?
>
>> > Paintings of paintings? Round, like a circle in a spiral, like a wheel
>> > within a wheel...
>
>> I'm pretty sure I've seen paintings which include icons as part of the
>> subject matter. Not the main subject matter, but just there in the room
>> too. I can't cite any examples, though. You will just have to choose
>> whether or not to believe me. Or I guess you could also choose to not
>> choose to either believe or disbelieve me. You could be grooagnostic.
>
> Could there be icons in some of Marc Chagall's paintings? I cannot
> remember any off-hand.
>
A quick Google doesn't seem to show any one (or few) really famous ones...
he's very prolific though.
That does raise a question of whether there are other truly famed artists
(iconic artists?) without an iconic painting, among those everyone
mentioned. Nobody mentioned Toulouse Lautrec, or Renoir, or Gaughin, for
three.
Mark Steese
news:Xns9646B00A2B9A294...@64.164.98.6:
>>>> You know the word iconic has been overused to the point of
>>>> meaninglessness when people start applying it without irony to
>>>> paintings other than icons.
>>>
>>> Would paintings of icons make you happy?
>>
>> Paintings of paintings? Round, like a circle in a spiral, like a
>> wheel within a wheel...
>
> I'm pretty sure I've seen paintings which include icons as part of the
> subject matter.
I'd be surprised if such were not the case. I just found the recursive
aspects of it amusing.
> Not the main subject matter, but just there in the room too. I can't
> cite any examples, though. You will just have to choose whether or not
> to believe me.
What makes you think I doubted you? There are wheels within wheels, as
well -- at least, I think that's a reasonable way to characterize
gyroscopes. There are even paintings of wheels within wheels, such as
the one that Ezekiel saw way up in the middle of the air.
>>> I would think that just about the only type of object that could not
>>> be called "iconic" is an actual icon. Isn't that kind of like
>>> calling an actual clown "clown-like"?
>>
>> Iconic, adj. 1: of, relating to, or having the character of an icon.
>> (Webster's Third fails to provide a definition of "clown-like.")
>>
>> What is it about the non-icon paintings mentioned in this thread that
>> seems iconic about them to you?
>
> What is it about my statement that makes you think that is the case?
What is it about my question that made you think that it was your
statement that made me think that was the case?
> I merely pointed out that icons should be somewhat exempt from being
> considered iconic, since it seems a bit redundant to say that an icon
> has the character of an icon. Kind of like calling rocks rocky, innit?
How else would you characterize them?
Mark Steese
news:42719ad0$0$91675$bb4e...@newscene.com:
[snip]
> Dürer's last self-portrait (several. most famous in Alte Pinakothek,
> Munich)
I'm pretty sure that Dürer's didn't paint several last self-portraits.
incandescent blue
>
> The reason I asked y'all to do this was that I was reading an article in the
> Chicago Tribune which was bragging about our local art museum, and it said
> that we had a large collection of those few paintings that can be called,
> uh, "iconic" (I don't remember what term they used, but they meant famous,
> often parodied, etc. etc.). The ones he cited were "Nighthawks", "American
> Gothic", and Seurat's "Grande Jatte". I was dubious whether Nighthawks or
> Grande Jatte should be considered in that category, but they were quickly
> mentioned in this thread so I'm confident they should and that it isn't
> merely self-serving to call those "iconic".
"Nighthawks" has spawned a lot of homages and parodies -- the best-known
is probably "Boulevard of Broken Dreams", where Hopper's diner patrons
are replaced by James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, Marlon Brando, and Elvis:
http://www.artafterdark.com/hidden/blvdbrkndrms_lg1.jpg
(I've seen an awful lot of framed posters of that with added neon tubes,
like http://www.memoriesoflove.com/collectible_memoribilia/bbddx.jpg).
And Tom Waits borrowed the title, of course...
"Grand Jatte" has been widely reproduced on posters, jigsaw puzzles, mugs,
etc.; it also inspired a Sondheim musical, "Sunday In The Park With George".
> Philadelphia Museum of Art - 2 (Charlemont's "The Moorish Chief" and
> Duchamp's "Nude Descending a Stairway")
That first one was my Philly years showing themselves. I spent many
happy hours wandering through PMA, and while the Charlemont piece is
certainly not as well known as the Monets and Warhols, it's really
quite riveting when seen in person...and judging by all the postcards,
posters, and t-shirts with this image in their museum store, it's not
just me. Here's a much better image than the last one I found:
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/showphoto.php/photo/16831/cat/964/page/1
> Leighton's "Flaming June" (don't know)
Museo de Arte de Ponce, Puerto Rico:
http://www.wcities.com/en/record/,165046/177/record.html
> 53 Stations of the Tokaido (Hiroshige) (woodblock prints - multiple)
The same should go for Hokusai's "Great Wave". Fine examples from both
print series can be seen in the Honolulu Academy of Art's James Michener
collection: http://www.honoluluacademy.org/perm/asian/james/index.htm
(And you might have fun seeing how many of those listed turn up at
http://muttscomics.com/art/tributes.asp)
M C Hamster
news:Xns9646CB3F...@130.133.1.4...
> "M C Hamster" <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote in
> news:42719ad0$0$91675$bb4e...@newscene.com:
>
> [snip]
>> Dürer's last self-portrait (several. most famous in Alte Pinakothek,
>> Munich)
>
> I'm pretty sure that Dürer's didn't paint several last self-portraits.
Amazing little known-fact: he was ambidextrous.
And he could paint with a brush in his teeth, too.
--
Lord Jubjub
<hankgillette-4EF8...@comcast.dca.giganews.com>,
Hank Gillette <hankgi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Another iconic painting to be considered is "Liberty Leading the
Masses". I did see the original in the Louvre and it is far more
impressive to me than the Mona Lisa (and about 10 times the size to
boot).
--
Leader of the Slithy Toves
Dana Carpender
M C Hamster wrote:
> Thanks for all the suggestions. Below for the record (I'm sure you'll all
> want to print out a copy for your files) is my compilation of these. The
> number in parentheses is the number of times it was mentioned.
>
> The reason I asked y'all to do this was that I was reading an article in the
> Chicago Tribune which was bragging about our local art museum, and it said
> that we had a large collection of those few paintings that can be called,
> uh, "iconic" (I don't remember what term they used, but they meant famous,
> often parodied, etc. etc.). The ones he cited were "Nighthawks", "American
> Gothic", and Seurat's "Grande Jatte". I was dubious whether Nighthawks or
> Grande Jatte should be considered in that category, but they were quickly
> mentioned in this thread so I'm confident they should and that it isn't
> merely self-serving to call those "iconic". There were two others in the
> Chicago Art Institute that at least one of you mentioned (Picasso's "Old
> Guitarist" and Magritte's "Time Transfixed", i.e., the train coming out of
> the wall), making 5 in all.
But you're forgetting this deathless work by Bacon:
http://www.sauer-thompson.com/junkforcode/archives/fbacon2.jpg
Dana
M C Hamster
news:slrnd738th.n80....@sidehack.sat.gweep.net...
> On 2005-04-29, M C Hamster <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
>>
>
>> 53 Stations of the Tokaido (Hiroshige) (woodblock prints - multiple)
>
> The same should go for Hokusai's "Great Wave". Fine examples from both
> print series can be seen in the Honolulu Academy of Art's James Michener
> collection: http://www.honoluluacademy.org/perm/asian/james/index.htm
>
Oh goody. That means I can drop one of the Met's six, dropping them into a
three-way tie with the Chicago Art Institute and MOMA with 5 iconic
paintings each!
(Of course, this being a Chicago museum and all, in this enumeration I
counted some paintings multiple times. Including ones from dead guys.)
Wait, I'm making another important decision! I had listed the Andy Warhol
Campbell Soup cans with MOMA, but actually the definitive soup can is, I
believe, in the Andy Warhol Museum in Pittsburgh
(http://www.vanartgallery.bc.ca/exhibitions_warhol.cfm) . MOMA has a
painting with a whole slew of Campbell soup cans
(http://www.artnet.com/Magazine/features/jsaltz/saltz1-25-3.asp) which is
why I listed it there, but I believe it's the solo soup can which is the
definitive icon. Or at the least, these are like Monet's Waterlilies.
Therefore, MOMA has now LOST ONE POINT, falling behind the Met and Chicago
Art Institute!
Isn't this exciting??
--
Blinky the Shark
> Oh goody. That means I can drop one of the Met's six, dropping them into a
> three-way tie with the Chicago Art Institute and MOMA with 5 iconic
> paintings each!
Yeah, but this isn't going to help the Cubs, is it?
Tim Wright
> I was reading an article which was mentioning some famous paintings as
> "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
> some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10, certainly)
> of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in this article
> and where I think he went wrong.
>
> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
>
incandescent blue
>
> Wait, I'm making another important decision! I had listed the Andy Warhol
> Campbell Soup cans with MOMA, but actually the definitive soup can is, I
> believe, in the Andy Warhol Museum in Pittsburgh
> (http://www.vanartgallery.bc.ca/exhibitions_warhol.cfm)
Official website, btw, at http://www.warhol.org/. It's a nifty place.
A. "if you're looking for a deeper meaning, I'm as deep as this high ceiling"
groo
130.133.1.4:
> groo <gr...@groo.org> wrote in
> news:Xns9646B00A2B9A294...@64.164.98.6:
>
>>> I merely pointed out that icons should be somewhat exempt from being
>> considered iconic, since it seems a bit redundant to say that an icon
>> has the character of an icon. Kind of like calling rocks rocky, innit?
>
> How else would you characterize them?
Maybe like the dictionary does.
It is accurate to call rocks rocky, and clowns clownish, so I guess it is
OK to call icons iconic. It just seems like a waste of perfectly good
vowels and consonants, though.
M C Hamster
news:slrnd73cav....@thurston.blinkynet.net...
>M C Hamster wrote:
>
>> Oh goody. That means I can drop one of the Met's six, dropping them into
>> a
>> three-way tie with the Chicago Art Institute and MOMA with 5 iconic
>> paintings each!
>
> Yeah, but this isn't going to help the Cubs, is it?
>
You're so mean.
Man, they sure could use some of our time-proven election tactics.
"Hey, ump... look over THERE!"
"The Cubs have runners on first and first and third."
groo
$bb4e...@newscene.com:
>
> And he could paint with a brush in his teeth, too.
>
Well, so could I. But they'd all come out looking like Jackson Pollack
paintings.
groo
news:4271aedf$0$91694$bb4e...@newscene.com:
>
> Wait, I'm making another important decision! I had listed the Andy
> Warhol Campbell Soup cans with MOMA, but actually the definitive soup
> can is, I believe, in the Andy Warhol Museum in Pittsburgh
> (http://www.vanartgallery.bc.ca/exhibitions_warhol.cfm) . MOMA has a
> painting with a whole slew of Campbell soup cans
> (http://www.artnet.com/Magazine/features/jsaltz/saltz1-25-3.asp) which
> is why I listed it there, but I believe it's the solo soup can which
> is the definitive icon. Or at the least, these are like Monet's
> Waterlilies.
>
> Therefore, MOMA has now LOST ONE POINT, falling behind the Met and
> Chicago Art Institute!
>
> Isn't this exciting??
>
Didn't Monet do a whole bunch of paintings of waterlilies? I've seen them
in multiple museums.
M C Hamster
news:Xns9646CB3F...@130.133.1.4...
> "M C Hamster" <davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote in
> news:42719ad0$0$91675$bb4e...@newscene.com:
>
> [snip]
>> Dürer's last self-portrait (several. most famous in Alte Pinakothek,
>> Munich)
>
> I'm pretty sure that Dürer's didn't paint several last self-portraits.
> --
His last is http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/durer/self/self-28.jpg .
Man, what a cool-lookin' dude. I wish I looked like that.
--
Blinky the Shark
> "Blinky the Shark" <no....@box.invalid> wrote in message
> news:slrnd73cav....@thurston.blinkynet.net...
>>M C Hamster wrote:
>>> Oh goody. That means I can drop one of the Met's six, dropping them into
>>> a
>>> three-way tie with the Chicago Art Institute and MOMA with 5 iconic
>>> paintings each!
>> Yeah, but this isn't going to help the Cubs, is it?
> You're so mean.
> Man, they sure could use some of our time-proven election tactics.
> "Hey, ump... look over THERE!"
> "The Cubs have runners on first and first and third."
If only you could get elected to the WS, eh?
M C Hamster
news:Xns9646DC81D913994...@64.164.98.29...
Yes, he did. The Chicago Art Institute has one of those, but I'm not
including that in their tally. It's still 5-5, in the bottom of the sixth.
Degas on second, Vermeer on first. With Action Jackson Pollack at bat.
incandescent blue
> That does raise a question of whether there are other truly famed artists
> (iconic artists?) without an iconic painting, among those everyone
> mentioned. Nobody mentioned Toulouse Lautrec, or Renoir, or Gaughin, for
> three.
If you're willing to accept iconic series or themes, like O'Keefe's
flowers and skulls or Mondrian's flat geometrics or Monet's waterlilies,
then I'd suggest Gauguin's Tahitian pictures. The combination of his flat,
bright style and Polynesian subjects is very distinctive, enough so that
even folks who aren't art-history fiends might associate them with some
half-forgotten bit from Art 101 or late night movies about that
French painter guy who ran off to the tropics to paint topless girls.
Toulouse-Lautrec, my first association would be with his advertising
work rather than his paintings -- those bright, blocky lithographs
of dancers are pretty distinctive.
For Renoir, the piece I've seen reproduced the most is probably
"Girl With A Watering-Can".
A. "Fauve? That's a football player, right?"
Mark Steese
news:Xns9646DB606BB0894...@64.164.98.29:
>>>> I merely pointed out that icons should be somewhat exempt from
>>>> being considered iconic, since it seems a bit redundant to say that an
>>> icon has the character of an icon. Kind of like calling rocks rocky,
>>> innit?
>>
>> How else would you characterize them?
>
> Maybe like the dictionary does.
So, you like looking at a rock and saying "Well, this is certainly
consolidated or unconsolidated solid mineral matter composed of one or
usually two or more minerals or partly of organic origin (as coal) that
occurs naturally in large quantities or forms a considerable part of the
earth's crust"? Whatever floats yer boat, man.
Ulo Melton
>Another iconic painting to be considered is "Liberty Leading the
>Masses".
More commonly known as "Jugs for Justice."
--
Ulo Melton
http://www.sewergator.com - Your Pipeline To Adventure
"Show me a man who is not afraid of being eaten by an alligator
in a sewer, and I'll show you a fool." -Roger Ebert
xho...@gmail.com
> "iconic", and I wasn't sure his list was very accurate, so I wondered if
> some of you might make a relatively short list (no more than 10,
> certainly) of these; then I'll let y'all know what ones he mentioned in
> this article and where I think he went wrong.
>
> I'll start you off: the Mona Lisa is one.
The Scream
The Last Supper
Starry Night
Darwin praying over his bread.
The one with the pregnant woman, her wierdly dressed husband, and the
convex mirror on the wall.
Xho
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
Charles Bishop
incandescent blue <die-bla...@hyacinthine.net> wrote:
[iconic art]
>I had the pleasure of seeing both this and "Flaming June" at an
>exhibit in the National Gallery of Art. a few years ago. In spite of
>long familiarity with both from books, webpages, etc., I just wasn't
>prepared for the impact of seeing the originals up close like that.
I'd recommend this for anyone that has a favorite painting they've seen
only in books (and now on web pages I suppose). I was similarly struck by
the paintings in an Impressionist exhibit that I saw in San Francisco. I
was living in LA at the time and made two more trips there, each time
dragging people with me, saying "you have to see these." Seeing a
reproduction of a painting in a book gives some information, composition
for linstance, but seeing the paiting itself is orders of magnitude more
impressive.
--
charles, true for all art, I'd expect
Charles Bishop
<davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
>"groo" <gr...@groo.org> wrote in message
>>
>> Didn't Monet do a whole bunch of paintings of waterlilies? I've seen them
>> in multiple museums.
>
>Yes, he did. The Chicago Art Institute has one of those, but I'm not
>including that in their tally. It's still 5-5, in the bottom of the sixth.
>Degas on second, Vermeer on first. With Action Jackson Pollack at bat.
Ah, man, he's a spatter hitter, spraying them all over the infield.
--
charles
John Hatpin
Similar for the Van Gogh museum in Amsterdam.
The works are arranged chronologically, so if you follow the suggested
route, you get to see his descent into insanity represented in his
drawings and paintings. It's a very strange experience.
--
John Hatpin
Zannah
John Hatpin <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> ctbi...@earthlink.netttt (Charles Bishop) wrote:
>
> >I'd recommend this for anyone that has a favorite painting they've seen
> >only in books (and now on web pages I suppose). I was similarly struck by
> >the paintings in an Impressionist exhibit that I saw in San Francisco. I
> >was living in LA at the time and made two more trips there, each time
> >dragging people with me, saying "you have to see these." Seeing a
> >reproduction of a painting in a book gives some information, composition
> >for linstance, but seeing the paiting itself is orders of magnitude more
> >impressive.
>
> Similar for the Van Gogh museum in Amsterdam.
>
> The works are arranged chronologically, so if you follow the suggested
> route, you get to see his descent into insanity represented in his
> drawings and paintings. It's a very strange experience.
Agreed. I never particularly liked Van Gogh until I saw the exhibition
in Amsterdam. You miss out on so much not seeing the actual paintings.
Zannah.
Mike Brandt
> incandescent blue <die-bla...@hyacinthine.net> wrote:
>
>>I had the pleasure of seeing both this and "Flaming June" at an
>>exhibit in the National Gallery of Art. a few years ago. In spite of
>>long familiarity with both from books, webpages, etc., I just wasn't
>>prepared for the impact of seeing the originals up close like that.
>
> I'd recommend this for anyone that has a favorite painting they've seen
> only in books (and now on web pages I suppose).
I always loved Titian's paintings, even having seen them only in books.
I was similarly moved seeing them in person - wow. Titian painted using
many layers of colored glazes, which give his paintings a shimmering
depth that isn't present in even the nicest reproductions. I also highly
recommend seeing "The Tempest", painted with the same technique by
Giorgione, Titian's master:
<http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/62/Giorgione_Tempest.jpg>
The depth and range of greens in that painting must be seen (in person!)
to be believed. (And while you're in Venice, get away from the tourist-
infested Grand Canal and you'll find treasures galore.)
I've also been stunned by the luminosity of Impressionist paintings,
particularly those by Renoir. That's something else that doesn't show
up in the books.
--
Mike Brandt
Charles Wm. Dimmick
> Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote in
>
>
>>Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The Sistine Chapel ceiling, particularly Adam and God nearly touching
>>>fingertips
>>
>>It was more fun before M. changed his mind and painted over the speech
>>balloon that said "Pull my finger."
>
>
> He couldn't figure out why nobody laughed. Then, right after he painted
> over it, he realized that he should have written "Tiri la mia barretta."
incandescent blue
>
> The one with the pregnant woman, her wierdly dressed husband, and the
> convex mirror on the wall.
Van Eyck's Arnolfini Portrait...already mentioned, IIRC.
http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/eyck/arnolfini/arnolfini.jpg
If you look at it closely, the woman isn't so obviously pregnant -- the
hand that at first seems to be cradling her belly is actually holding
up part of the overskirts of her heavy, trailing gown: the sheer bulk
of fabric in a dress like that is more than sufficient to create the
impression of a pregnant silhouette when held up in front like that,
especially in conjunction with her fashionable slouching posture.
The style of the era was such that her houppeland might be so long
that it *had* to be lifted up when walking to keep from treading on
the hem...and for portraiture, raising the overskirts allowed for
display of the rich fabrics of the gown and underskirts beneath the
outer garment. You can see a similar slouching pose, and skirt lifted
in one hand, in an image from a 15th century book of hours:
http://www.theatre.ubc.ca/dress_decor/medieval_world_dress_late_ma.htm
Jim Shaffer
<davo...@speakeasy.hairnet> wrote:
>Picture of Lincoln made of smaller images (?)
Are we talking about "Lincoln in Dalivision, or Gala Contemplating the
Mediterranean Sea at Twenty Meters Becomes the Portrait of Abraham
Lincoln", or is there another one? (I may have the distance wrong.)
Jim Beaver
impossible to find even a fictional cinematic representation of the Oval
Office that doesn't contain at least one. But is there a Remington painting
as iconic (or near-iconic) as Bronco Buster, Comin' Through the Rye, or
Rattlesnake?
Jim Beaver
Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer)
> Rauchenberg's White Paintings. Take you pick.
I don't think it's going to show up as an editorial cartoon any time
soon, though.
I thought of another group, Mondrian's grid paintings. Everyone
recognizes them.
Mary
--
Mary Shafer Retired aerospace research engineer
reunite....@gmail.com or mil...@qnet.com
Elizabeth Garner
>On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 03:37:03 GMT, Lord Jubjub <jub...@ev1.net> wrote:
>>Another iconic painting to be considered is "Liberty Leading the
>>Masses".
>
>More commonly known as "Jugs for Justice."
The painting is acceptable to some in France only because
ex-Miss France 2005 was not the model.
Elizabeth Garner
--
C:\WINDOWS C:\WINDOWS\GO C:\PC\CRAWL
Elizabeth Garner
>incandescent blue <die-bla...@hyacinthine.net> wrote:
>
>[iconic art]
>
>>I had the pleasure of seeing both this and "Flaming June" at an
>>exhibit in the National Gallery of Art. a few years ago. In spite of
>>long familiarity with both from books, webpages, etc., I just wasn't
>>prepared for the impact of seeing the originals up close like that.
>
>I'd recommend this for anyone that has a favorite painting they've seen
>only in books (and now on web pages I suppose). I was similarly struck by
>the paintings in an Impressionist exhibit that I saw in San Francisco. I
>was living in LA at the time and made two more trips there, each time
>dragging people with me, saying "you have to see these." Seeing a
>reproduction of a painting in a book gives some information, composition
>for linstance, but seeing the paiting itself is orders of magnitude more
>impressive.
Like many people, I'm fond of Van Gogh's "Starry Night," though I did not
know where it was hung. On a visit to New York's Museum of Modern Art a
few years ago, I was startled to round a corner and find it right in
front of my face. Great serendipity.
Part of the surprise is how much smaller it is than I had visualized.
John Hatpin
>Like many people, I'm fond of Van Gogh's "Starry Night," though I did not
>know where it was hung. On a visit to New York's Museum of Modern Art a
>few years ago, I was startled to round a corner and find it right in
>front of my face. Great serendipity.
>
>Part of the surprise is how much smaller it is than I had visualized.
That seems to be such a frequent reaction that it's become a cliche.
I don't understand why, since we normally see reproductions in books,
and they're smaller than the real thing.
It would make more sense for people to say "Wow! The Mona Lisa is
massive - much bigger than I'd imagined!", but we don't, for some
reason. Mostly, originals look tiny.
--
John Hatpin
M C Hamster
message news:crg771hqd5vvjlho3...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:13:51 -0700, Dr H <hiaw...@efn.org> wrote:
>
>> Rauchenberg's White Paintings. Take you pick.
>
> I don't think it's going to show up as an editorial cartoon any time
> soon, though.
>
> I thought of another group, Mondrian's grid paintings. Everyone
> recognizes them.
They were on my list, already mentioned by someone, FYI.
S. Checker
> Ulo Melton <melt...@sewergator.com> wrote:
>>On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 03:37:03 GMT, Lord Jubjub <jub...@ev1.net> wrote:
>
>>>Another iconic painting to be considered is "Liberty Leading the
>>>Masses".
>>
>>More commonly known as "Jugs for Justice."
>
> The painting is acceptable to some in France only because
> ex-Miss France 2005 was not the model.
>
Note that the sigmonster editorializes on its own.
--
Ignorance has no expiration date. Wisdom goes bad faster than a wilted
spinach salad at a fast food drive through.
-- Bill on afca