In "Jacob wrestling with an angel", Gauguin paints 'red fied' in order to create an arcane 'dreamscape'. Punters told that this is a piece of 'modern art', a new development in expression. BUT YOU CAN SEE exactly THE SAME ARTISTIC DEVICE used in a piece of 12TH CENTURY vitrage at Chartres Cathedral. (dont see any evidence that Gauguin visited Chartres)
I started developing my new symbolism in February 2020 when I started drawing after three years of not painting. Every element depicted in my works has a personal meaning, and a complex story behind it. The symbol of a tree I call Gaia -mythological Greek goddess of earth, soil, and all organic life. It has its powers deep within the roots, and it can stimulate super volcanoes to annihilate all life to bring complete extinction. My “Gaia tree” provides food in abundance to all the species on earth and under water. Often there is a fruit resembling the fruit of temptation from the garden of Eden. And occasionally, I am using biblical symbol to express abundance this planet provides for its inhabitants. Often my Apple is manipulated into situation, where it distinctly becomes an object of desire. Pandora’s box at the lower left corner supposed to be a reminder that everything in this universe obeys laws of atrophy. Nothing stays the same forever even atoms deteriorate. Often magical energy from Pandoras box is penetrating many elements in my artwork. By doing so I am showing universal presence of creative and destructive forces in every square inch in our universe.
It's always just killed me how over the years I've seen non artist/painters think they know a piece or the artist just by starring at a painting for hours. Including with my work. Than totally make a fool out of themselves when speaking about the piece/artist.
Quite true that a lot of rubbish is written/spoken by self confessed 'experts' - wise only to those who eirther know nothing about art, or are incapable of aprreciating art (poetry) - one needs to 'see' what the artist is looking at. The real problem arises when we try to impose contemporary (often idiotic) taste onto to pictures painted in a past age. Aesthtic sensibility - not bullshit (ie academic or political verbiage) - is required in order to even begin to see the poetry presented in any art's work. I think that is what you are trying to say.
Why do you not show the whole paintings? The artist's COMPOSITION isn't important enough to show? Paintings are static objects of contemplation...animating them destroys that. Cut up pieces of paintings kept in constant motion is NOT the art experience intended by the artists.
Love this as I’m trying to get back to painting again after the pandemic.
Maravilha!
manifique
In "Jacob wrestling with an angel", Gauguin paints 'red fied' in order to create an arcane 'dreamscape'. Punters told that this is a piece of 'modern art', a new development in expression. BUT YOU CAN SEE exactly THE SAME ARTISTIC DEVICE used in a piece of 12TH CENTURY vitrage at Chartres Cathedral. (dont see any evidence that Gauguin visited Chartres)
I started developing my new symbolism in February 2020 when I started drawing after three years of not painting. Every element depicted in my works has a personal meaning, and a complex story behind it.
The symbol of a tree I call Gaia -mythological Greek goddess of earth, soil, and all organic life. It has its powers deep within the roots, and it can stimulate super volcanoes to annihilate all life to bring complete extinction. My “Gaia tree” provides food in abundance to all the species on earth and under water. Often there is a fruit resembling the fruit of temptation from the garden of Eden. And occasionally, I am using biblical symbol to express abundance this planet provides for its inhabitants. Often my Apple is manipulated into situation, where it distinctly becomes an object of desire.
Pandora’s box at the lower left corner supposed to be a reminder that everything in this universe obeys laws of atrophy.
Nothing stays the same forever even atoms deteriorate. Often magical energy from Pandoras box is penetrating many elements in my artwork. By doing so I am showing universal presence of creative and destructive forces in every square inch in our universe.
you have issues
Nice to see comment from an artist - thank you.
It's always just killed me how over the years I've seen non artist/painters think they know a piece or the artist just by starring at a painting for hours. Including with my work. Than totally make a fool out of themselves when speaking about the piece/artist.
Quite true that a lot of rubbish is written/spoken by self confessed 'experts' - wise only to those who eirther know nothing about art, or are incapable of aprreciating art (poetry) - one needs to 'see' what the artist is looking at. The real problem arises when we try to impose contemporary (often idiotic) taste onto to pictures painted in a past age. Aesthtic sensibility - not bullshit (ie academic or political verbiage) - is required in order to even begin to see the poetry presented in any art's work. I think that is what you are trying to say.
genial
Did not Gauguin live in the Mayoral/Presidential Estates in Peru as a child?
Why do you not show the whole paintings? The artist's COMPOSITION isn't important enough to show? Paintings are static objects of contemplation...animating them destroys that.
Cut up pieces of paintings kept in constant motion is NOT the art experience intended by the artists.
👍👍🥰🥰
Ttrytrddactrecfrkjdiokertoouidhiytrdxrgirujyrdsurhrcrconnayddskdoheslrfityttrdetrehiytudokrdiblilrdjrduidtiuyjhfsuyrtteortrrikhrffirijhtfdhhonltosuyrd
Fascinating, what language is this
Absolutely!
Fake history ! Erreurs de dates et anachronismes nombreux et commentaires ignorants.