John
He was too hopeless.
------
Edward
At what? Can you post some jpegs of ancient chinese cubism?
> I grew up with an awareness of the Western and Eastern forms of paintings
and it isn't difficult
> to know which is superior.
Neither are 'superior'? You would have to transport Picasso to ancient China
and raise him in that culture in order to see what sort of ancient Chinese
painter he would have made. This is an asinine comparison. I hope you've
posted this as a joke, for I much prefer to think I'm helping you with a
nonsense experiment here rather than actually having to refute this
silliness.
> Stylisation is the way of Chinese art,
> which culminated in the Ming dynasty. What Picasso was doing was just
> a form of reinvented Chinese art, glorified by the media of the
> earlier 20C who were not acquainted with the Chinese.
How do you explain this lack of awareness of Chinese culture in the 20th
century media? I always thought Chinese/Asian culture was relevant across
Europe well before the 20th century, and even in America by the late 1800s.
Am I wrong?
MG
Yet, no ancient Chinese names pop readily to mind as relevant in any way to
the art of the now. What a rip-off!
MG
------
Edward
"To paint a portrait, you first spend three days talking with your
subject.
Then you go home and paint the portrait." This is supposed to be
a Chinese advice. Anyway it tells me the difference of
photorealistic rendering and art.
-lauri
c. c. wang
http://www.echinaart.com/Advisor/adv_ccwang_landscape.htm
David
Rainbow, CA
1.17.02
> "To paint a portrait, you first spend three days talking with your
> subject.
> Then you go home and paint the portrait." This is supposed to be
> a Chinese advice
And Picasso really heed the advice.... well done. Even if he is not
Chinese, he is certainly a great student... Well done grass hopper
John
> At what? Can you post some jpegs of ancient chinese cubism?
Origami... though it is Japanese. Perhaps you are right they didn't
do it in oil but they certainly did it on (or rather with) paper!
Actually, I don't see why paper foldings are not put into museums as
many I have seen are much greater then Picasso's.
> Neither are 'superior'?
No Picasso's is still superior to the Chinese because he has the media
behind him. Isn't that how you judge Art?
> How do you explain this lack of awareness of Chinese culture in the 20th
> century media? I always thought Chinese/Asian culture was relevant across
> Europe well before the 20th century, and even in America by the late 1800s.
> Am I wrong?
The West were hardly influenced by the Chinese even until today,
except some distorted view. In the past, the lack of awareness was
largely due to distance.
John
-lauri