more stupid Picasso
Mani Deli
>
>Picasso is said to have worked extremely hard on the Gertrude Stein
>portrait taking many sittings and then revising it without the model a
>year later. I believe its really the best he could do.
>
>Here we have a very ordinary portrait, utterly conventional in
>placement and composition, containing nothing new at all, a good early
>example of Picasso’s No-Skill-Realism. I have seen the Portrait of
>Gertrude Stein" (1906) in the museum many times and always wondered
>why it should hang there.
>
>If this painting was hanging in some dimly lit university hallway
>with another signature minus the hype among the usual portraits, it
>would be judged the among the worst.
>
>The eyes and part of the mouth are like decals that have been
>transferred to a solid head which looks like it was sculpted in rough,
>carelessly tinted plaster. The wig looks like a mud flap that is
>beginning to slide down the face and along the side of a flat pancake
>ear. Unable to realistically separate the background and the cheek, he
>did what a student would do, by drawing a brown line around it.
>
>In order to get the best overview of the rest of this painting, cover
>the face with a scrap of paper torn to fit over it and look at the
>remainder of the picture. Note the "brown sauce" effect which is a
>term accusingly used to point out a characteristic of academic
>monotony. The solidity of the hands gives way to a body which is
>little more than an amorphous brown blob while the background
>deteriorates into a lot of dry brown crudely blended schmier. Even the
>color is terrible and doesn’t display Picasso’s colorist’s skill.
>
>Is this supposed to be a masterpiece?
No skill no art!
Tired of Modern Art? check http://www3.sympatico.ca/manideli/
Freddy Fingerpaint
class fuck act mediocre fuck talk that is stupid.One look at your website is
enough.You dont even understand the basics of skill.
"Mani Deli" <ma...@sympatico.ca> schreef in bericht
news:el8580dl85n7ioiil...@4ax.com...
cantueso
> .........Picasso is not stupid....... frustrations and middle
> class fuck act mediocre fuck talk...... >>>>
you are not very articulate, are you?
I wonder what you mean.
maybe you ought to have your dentures checked.
cantueso
> " Freddy Fingerpaint"
> .........Picasso is not stupid....... frustrations and middle
> > class fuck act mediocre fuck talk...... >>>>
>
> you are not very articulate, are you?
>
> I wonder what you mean.
>
> maybe you ought to have your dentures checked.
did you get your dentures checked?
Gorne
know why I made the mistake but it was an honest mistake) do not like
Picasso and prefer Disney .
It is clearly is prerogative and it challenge the history of Art,
which is not a crime per se.
What is not clear is the artistic value Mani approved of.
Does he like freedom?
Does he like ease and directness?
Does he prefers manual dexterity like that of trapeze artist?
The more difficult the achievement, the more relevant the "skill"
Is the moon rover the greatest artistic expression of the twentieth
century.
Is the flag immobile on the moon absent atmosphere more humane than a
child holding a white bird?
Was it a competition anyway? With Mani as judge and Jury?
Gorne
> > you are not very articulate, are you?
He claims that Picasso had no skill.
No skill therefore no Art.
The question is what is the skill Mani is looking for.
Does he prefers the skill needed to paint the best Dutch still life
with these wonderful flower arrangement to Guernica?
If he does he shares at least something with Hitler and Goring.
That does not mean that those Dutch artist had no skill. Obviously
they did.
It means that Mani fail to understand what guernica was and is about.
There is a difference between painting pretty pictures and being an
artist.
Artist is not about skill. It is about sharing your soul.
cantueso
> Does he like freedom?
> Does he like ease and directness?
> Does he prefers manual dexterity like that of trapeze artist?
> The more difficult the achievement, the more relevant the "skill"
> Is the moon rover the greatest artistic expression of the twentieth
> century.
I think he needed to simplify his terms in order to be more agile in
the fight. I also think that though skill is basic, it is not the
clue. yet I canot think of any great artist who was not also very
skilfull.
cantueso
> He claims that Picasso had no skill.
> No skill therefore no Art.
I think Picasso's drawings show all the skill in the world. I would
have thought too much skill and nothing else, but I do not know much
about these things
> If he does he shares at least something with Hitler and Goring.
that is a rather silly remark. it is in fact a terrible remark, but
you probably did not think long enough. it is terrible because it
sounds serious but is frivolous to a sickening degree.
>
> It means that Mani fail to understand what guernica was and is about.
failSSSS to understand. here it is again, that curious little mistake
of yours which made me compare a text of yours to a kettle of broth
being prepared by Macbeth's witches, because of the mix of
sophisticated imagery and third-person-S mistakes.
> There is a difference between painting pretty pictures and being an
> artist.
> Artist is not about skill. It is about sharing your soul.
but tell me the name of a great artist who was not skilfull.
DNALJM
>failSSSS to understand. here it is again, that curious little mistake
>of yours which made me compare a text of yours to a kettle of broth
>being prepared by Macbeth's witches, because of the mix of
>sophisticated imagery and third-person-S mistakes.
The new troll is giving grammar lessons, how ironic!
>I would
>have thought too much skill and nothing else, but I do not know much
>about these things
>
Sounds like an ideal position to run your mouth off from.
Jane
Mani Deli
>cant...@dieznet.com (cantueso) asked
>> > you are not very articulate, are you?
>Actually Mani is very articulate.
>He claims that Picasso had no skill.
>No skill therefore no Art.
Never claimed Picasso has NO skill. He's far more skilled than most of
the Modern Academic art that followed. My main claim about Picasso is
that he's far from being the great artist that critics claim him to
be. He's no better than a third rate cartoonist for reasons I have
often indicated here and that takes some skill.
Mani Deli
>The question is what is the skill Mani is looking for.
>Does he prefers the skill needed to paint the best Dutch still life
>with these wonderful flower arrangement to Guernica?
>If he does he shares at least something with Hitler and Goring.
Remember, if Hitler doesn't like it it's good.
>
>That does not mean that those Dutch artist had no skill. Obviously
>they did.
Really?
>It means that Mani fail to understand what guernica was and is about.
Sure' you UNDERSTAND Guernica. Now just tell us what you understand.
Bet I get the usual.
>
>There is a difference between painting pretty pictures and being an
>artist.
There is a difference between doing ugly, incompetent, repetitive
pictures and being considered a great artist.
>Artist is not about skill. It is about sharing your soul.
No skill no art!
Gorne
>
> that is a rather silly remark. it is in fact a terrible remark, but
> you probably did not think long enough. it is terrible because it
> sounds serious but is frivolous to a sickening degree.
What I wrote was:
What is the skill Mani is looking for?
Does he prefers the skill needed to paint the best Dutch still life
to Guernica?
Hitler and Goring liked Dutch paintings. For them Picasso's paintings
were the work of a degenerate. I asked if Mani agree with them.
Hitler also loved German shepherd... does that means that all German
shepherd lovers should be offended?
Mani, I believe, expressed a certain desire to be unconventional. It
is intriguing that he shares the same taste as some of the most
virulent right wingers of the last century. Mani is also not aware of
the historical marking his choices, if they are his choices, have.
Sorry I made some spelling mistakes. I appreciate your corrections and
thank you for your good will and understanding. I use spell check but
this kind of mistake are not corrected with it.
Gorne
the infant holding a white dove. And he compares these hands to Mickey
Mouse three fingered glove. Actually that is a pretty clever remark.
Disney simplified the hand in order to satisfy the animation process,
I assume, because the treatment off Mickey does not give more
importance to the gloves than for instance to the yellow button on
Mickey's short.
On the contrary Picasso, by is very treatment give more importance to
the
head of the bird, to the face of the child, to the gesture of
protection and joy . Rather than informing us of the trivial aspect of
these hands, Picasso tell us that he values this gesture more than the
accuracy of an insignificant detail description.
It is Picasso who is in line with art history and humanism and Disney
who is talented surely but also more commercial, more superficial.
Both have skill. Both have brain. Both had some justifiable success.
cantueso
> Never claimed Picasso has NO skill. He's far more skilled than most of
> the Modern Academic art that followed. My main claim about Picasso is
> that he's far from being the great artist that critics claim him to
> be. He's no better than a third rate cartoonist for reasons I have
> often indicated here and that takes some skill.
I do not know enough about it. since I do not like Picasso very much,
I have not looked at his work very closely. I like the drawings. they
are impressive in their lightness and technical ease. and so they look
a bit cold. and cold people tend to be sentimental, don´t they. the
lack of feeling makes them look for some substitute, unless indeed
they learn how to use their minds.
sorry. that was off topic, wasn't it.
and then the colours. I think that is where Picasso is so impersonal
as to look redundant. where he uses sentimental colours, light blue,
light brown and some light pink, well, it looks nice and decorative,
if not exactly memorable. when he tries to use more explicit colours,
well........
and I can't really judge because I do not know enough.
Don Ramirez
emotion or art or whatever you will call it.
"Mani Deli" <ma...@sympatico.ca> schreef in bericht
news:itjt80h0pmf16q6hl...@4ax.com...
Tony Ramirez
Mani Deli
>Mani Deli <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>
>
>> Never claimed Picasso has NO skill. He's far more skilled than most of
>> the Modern Academic art that followed. My main claim about Picasso is
>> that he's far from being the great artist that critics claim him to
>> be. He's no better than a third rate cartoonist for reasons I have
>> often indicated here and that takes some skill.
>
>I do not know enough about it. since I do not like Picasso very much,
>I have not looked at his work very closely.
-do that perhaps you will like him even less.
> I like the drawings. they
>are impressive in their lightness and technical ease. and so they look
>a bit cold. and cold people tend to be sentimental, don´t they. the
>lack of feeling makes them look for some substitute, unless indeed
>they learn how to use their minds.
His drawing is no better then very average and it got considerably
worse over time.
>and then the colours.
Picasso was at times a good colorist. However color is no cover up for
a lack of skill. Lots of people can do well colored design.
> I think that is where Picasso is so impersonal
>as to look redundant. where he uses sentimental colours, light blue,
>light brown and some light pink, well, it looks nice and decorative,
>if not exactly memorable. when he tries to use more explicit colours,
>well........
>
>and I can't really judge because I do not know enough.
>>
One doesn't need to know much in order form an opinion on artwork.
Mani Deli
<Don...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>The trouble with it all is that you can measure skill but you cannot measure
>emotion or art or whatever you will call it.
>
Emotion or art or whatever you will call it," is useless without a
foundation of skill.
Mani Deli
>Mani brought to our attention on how Picasso had treated the hands of
>the infant holding a white dove. And he compares these hands to Mickey
>Mouse three fingered glove. Actually that is a pretty clever remark.
>
>Disney simplified the hand in order to satisfy the animation process,
>I assume, because the treatment off Mickey does not give more
>importance to the gloves than for instance to the yellow button on
>Mickey's short.
>
>On the contrary Picasso, by is very treatment give more importance to
>the
>head of the bird, to the face of the child, to the gesture of
>protection and joy .
All of which are badly done. The only value in the painting is the
signature. If it were signed R. Mutt nobody would bother with it.
>Rather than informing us of the trivial aspect of
>these hands, Picasso tell us that he values this gesture more than the
>accuracy of an insignificant detail description.
Picasso doesn't tell a damned thing. Its on a level of kiddie art.
> is in line with art history and humanism
Its in line with the rest of 20th century incompetent stupid art.
> and Disney
>who is talented surely but also more commercial,
Nobody is more commercial than Picasso.
> more superficial.
>Both have skill. Both have brain. Both had some justifiable success.
cantueso
> >I have not looked at his work very closely.
>
> -do that perhaps you will like him even less.
but what is the point? life is short; there are many great things; so
I go after those. there is no need and no time for things that I do
not understand, unless indeed they are somehow part of one's
obligations ..
> His drawing is no better then very average and it got considerably
> worse over time.
so tell me what modern people could draw like that. he must have
enjoyed drawing
I know something about language and nothing about pictures. I am here
because I have a friend who draws and paints, and so I got involved.
but he had to teach me how to look and even how to see. :-) and if I
do not know what to say, I go and ask him because he can't type very
well. his back is shot. do you want to see one of his drawings?
> Picasso was at times a good colorist. However color is no cover up for
> a lack of skill. Lots of people can do well colored design.
now here there is a problem. it is not good enough to say "good" and
"bad" and "third class". I often go to look at things at e-bay. I
think that good colour is rare. but what is good colour?
> > I think that is where Picasso is so impersonal
> One doesn't need to know much in order form an opinion on artwork.
but one does need to know a lot to represent an opinion. that is
really really basic. by showing what I know, I would show that I have
listened to other people and that what I say takes into account what
others have said. not like people who talk about yesterday's movie.
don't you see? otherwise it is just my gusto against your gusto,
everybody turning up their noses. it is NOT a question of taste. I it
is something completely different. but WHAT IS IT? I do not "like" El
Greco, but I know he is great. I know it very very well, would never
doubt it for a second. so now what is this?
Gorne
> Emotion or art or whatever you will call it," is useless without a
> foundation of skill.
Skill is useless. Skill is what great artist try to forget. High teck
can replace all the skill Mani Deli could conceive.
In the 1930 Picasso, skill or not, communicated through his painting a
theme: Make love not War. That was before the second world war, before
the hippy movement.
Toward the end of his life Picasso describe artist as narcicist and
peeping toms.
All this is a lot more than Mani has offered so far,
No skill just Bull... and not drawn by Picasso.
As for the value of Painting it is established by supplies and
demands.
The just price is set when somebody accept to let the painting go for
the price somebody is willing to pay.
How much has anybody been willing to pay for Mani's paintings?
If mani is right about signature, did he try to sign them Picasso?
Did he sell any that way?
Did he get any one willing to pay for his skill?
Mani Deli
>Mani Deli <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<135090t504mcbapth...@4ax.com>...
>
>> Emotion or art or whatever you will call it," is useless without a
>> foundation of skill.
>Skill is useless.
I'm sure for you it is. I bet the fact shows in your work.
> Skill is what great artist try to forget.
and great charlatans have no choice but to forget.
> High teck
>can replace all the skill Mani Deli could conceive.
and any high priced Modern Academic Art decorative wall covering.
>In the 1930 Picasso, skill or not, communicated through his painting a
>theme: Make love not War.
Big deal, the Pope mumbles that twice a day.
>That was before the second world war, before
>the hippy movement.
>Toward the end of his life Picasso describe artist as narcicist and
>peeping toms.
and surrounded by yes-men he copied himself about three times a day in
order to become the worlds greatest high priced schlock painter. Bravo
Picasso!
>All this is a lot more than Mani has offered so far,
>
>No skill just Bull... and not drawn by Picasso.
Picasso couldn't draw a bull.
>As for the value of Painting it is established by supplies and
>demands.
>The just price is set when somebody accept to let the painting go for
>the price somebody is willing to pay.
gee how informative.
>How much has anybody been willing to pay for Mani's paintings?
What's that got to do with Picasso?
>If mani is right about signature, did he try to sign them Picasso?
>Did he sell any that way?
Picasso is forged and sold.
>Did he get any one willing to pay for his skill?
I made a living at it for about 15 years. How are you doing?
Gorne
> >How much has anybody been willing to pay for Mani's paintings?
>
> What's that got to do with Picasso?
>
> >If mani is right about signature, did he try to sign them Picasso?
> >Did he sell any that way?
>
> Picasso is forged and sold.
>
> >Did he get any one willing to pay for his skill?
>
> I made a living at it for about 15 years. How are you doing?
>
> No skill no art!
This has nothing to do with Picasso.
It has to do with your opinions that you have presented as facts.
I do not asked you if Picasso was forged and sold.
I asked you if you had tried to make a painting demonstrating all your
skill
then signed it Picasso... would it sell for the price of a Picasso?
You claim of having made a living for 15 years at finding people
willing to pay for your skill. I don't believe it... not based on your
display...
Based on the display I would say that you have no skill no art. That
you are tired of modern art but incapable of offering any better.
This is a challenge. What do you, Mani, have to offer that is worthy
of our attention? Anything else than negative statements?
You are tired of modern Art, give it up and tell us what you are
enthusiastic about. Or is it a pathology?
Mani Deli
>Mani Deli <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<euq390hvnqa99haso...@4ax.com>...
>
>> >How much has anybody been willing to pay for Mani's paintings?
>>
>> What's that got to do with Picasso?
>>
>> >If mani is right about signature, did he try to sign them Picasso?
>> >Did he sell any that way?
>>
>> Picasso is forged and sold.
>>
>> >Did he get any one willing to pay for his skill?
>>
>> I made a living at it for about 15 years. How are you doing?
>>
>> No skill no art!
>
>This has nothing to do with Picasso.
>It has to do with your opinions that you have presented as facts.
Name some opinions I present as facts.
>I do not asked you if Picasso was forged and sold.
>I asked you if you had tried to make a painting demonstrating all your
>skill then signed it Picasso... would it sell for the price of a Picasso?
>You claim of having made a living for 15 years at finding people
>willing to pay for your skill. I don't believe it..
I don't give a shit!
> not based on your
>display...
>Based on the display I would say that you have no skill no art.
Wonder if this guy teaches?
> That
>you are tired of modern art but incapable of offering any better.
and where's you stuff?
>This is a challenge. What do you, Mani, have to offer that is worthy
>of our attention?
For $100 I'll send you a list.
>We know that you love of modern art and are incapable of offering anything at all .
>This is a challenge. What do you, do Gorne? What do you have to offer that is worthy
>of our attention?
>Anything else than negative statements?
Yes, after reading about 40 years of your sort of bullshit go
unchallenged, I believe its time for a bit from the other side and I
glad it irritates you and many others.
>You are tired of modern Art, give it up and tell us what you are
>enthusiastic about.
Check my web site and former messages.
Gorne
Christian Zervos met Picasso in 1926. He founded a publishing house
named Cahiers d'Art and in 1932 embarked on an extensive Catalogue
raisonne of Picasso's paintings and work on paper. Zervos explained
that he was aiming at showing the development of Picasso's work and
the constant labor of the artist. Extending to thirty four volumes
reproducing over 16000 work this Catalogue covers the entire life of
Picasso from 1932 and 1978. The collection was sold for more than
$60000.
Can you explain how the above facts could possibly take place without
skill when you present your web site as evidence of skill.
On you web site you show two naked women and a title state your
opinion that they aint't looking so bad.
In your opinion do they look as good as Playboy center page last
month?
Heaven Knows
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 13:47:16 +0200, "Don Ramirez"
> <Don...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> >The trouble with it all is that you can measure skill but you cannot measure
> >emotion or art or whatever you will call it.
> >
>
> Emotion or art or whatever you will call it," is useless without a
> foundation of skill.
Must say Mani, you a very entitled to dislike Modern Art. We need
variety in this world to make it interesting. I am curious to know
what "art"..or should I say painter… since you do like to categorize…
you find PLEASING? SKILLFULL? WORTH WASTING YOUR TIME VIEWING? Just
an example or two would be nice. Are you more into contemporary art?
By the way, I believe many artists can be very significant in a
certain time of history. Yet lose their impact / greatness as time
goes by. I believe Picasso's art revolutionized the art world during
the earlier part of the 20th century, and that is why he's been given
so much hype. And one can say that his paintings influenced politics
and financial markets. Even today, he has great influence in these
realms. Guernica is presently in the UN. When Colin Powell was being
televised from the UN stating that the US would go to war ,with or
without the UN's support..Picasso's Guerincia was covered up… instead
of being filmed as Mr.Powell's background for this historical moment.
Renault latest car is called "Picasso". And is making Renault money.
Just two modern examples of his influence. One could say this was a
"skillful" move.
Heaven Knows
> Very rude Fred but i see your point.There is no need to insult Mr.Deli btw.
debate burning thru my eyes, just looking at the screen.
I think this is great. The mental muscle is ...was... pumping for a
bit to validate our likes and dislikes. Oui,Oui,Oui. It did get
controversial and personal. But I do believe art is a matter of
personal taste. So it's bound to get personal. Bravo Picasso,
Grone, and Mani !! For putting what's personal to you, up on the
line..and out to dry.
Know kiss and make up. Afterall it's just words..and PERSONAL
opinions. If you don't value someones opinion...you shouldn't let it
bother you. Just carry-on, chaps.
Gorne
> It get controversial and personal. But I do believe art is a matter of
> personal taste.... Bravo for putting what's personal to you, up on the
> line.
Is Art only a matter of personal taste? Is there anything in Art that
address values common to large social communities? Like American Art
distinguishable from European Art? Like Pompier Art distinguishable
from Modern Art?
And beyond impossible arguments to justify personal taste, Is it
possible to discuss common values that characterize specific artistic
community?
Isn't it fun to discuss such values on this forum?
And wether we agree or disagree can we notice that fun is a common
value on this forum.
Electric Nachos
Gorne wrote in message <91f9f335.04050...@posting.google.com>...
>Is Art only a matter of personal taste? Is there anything in Art that
>address values common to large social communities? Like American Art
>distinguishable from European Art? Like Pompier Art distinguishable
>from Modern Art?
http://www.diacenter.org/km/index.html
Gorne
This was a facinating trip. I specialy appreciated the elephant art
colorful extra and it was large communities etc.. If I was a teacher
you'd get an A.