The Art Thread

[Charles Darnay]

A bit different from your recollection, but good to see you found it none the less.

yeah, sorry: thanks for the help nonetheless.

I think my mind has combined Classens' painting with Bosch's Garden into some weird, I've got to stop absorbing too much art at the same time, mess.

[stlukesguild]

Now that my thoughts are on Moses, I'm recalling the sculpture of Moses with horns by Michelangelo at San Pietro in Vincoli Rome.

The year I graduated from Art School I moved to New York where I worked for a while as a "demo-man" (tearing out conduit and pipes out of a building being renovated and turned into artist's work-live studio apartments. The head demo-man... a towering man at least 6 foot 6 in height with a full flowing beard worthy of an Old Testament prophet looked like Michelangelo's Moses to an astonishing... I should say a disconcerting extent... especially as I'd never met another individual who swore as consistently... and with such bravura... as he did. His most eloquent and passionate use of profanity was reserved for his partner, a little black man from the islands (the Bahamas or there about) named Griff. "Moses" got his comeuppance one night when after getting paid we all ended up in a bar where Griff and he engaged in a competition downing shots of rum... the loser to pay. In spite of his admirable height and heft, rum was like mother's milk to little Griff who ended up drinking "Moses" under the table... where he literally passed out and spent the rest of the evening.

[Mr.lucifer]

Hey Luke, how come you don't post pics of your art anymore?

[stlukesguild]

Considering that I have been painting nudes for some time, I've somewhat shied away from posting these considering the wrong ideas some have concerning nudity in art. I can't say I ever got much response when I did post my work here one way or the other, on the other hand... I have recently been showing a number of the works at a local gallery and university art department.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Now that my thoughts are on Moses, I'm recalling the sculpture of Moses with horns by Michelangelo at San Pietro in Vincoli Rome.

The year I graduated from Art School I moved to New York where I worked for a while as a "demo-man" (tearing out conduit and pipes out of a building being renovated and turned into artist's work-live studio apartments. The head demo-man... a towering man at least 6 foot 6 in height with a full flowing beard worthy of an Old Testament prophet looked like Michelangelo's Moses to an astonishing... I should say a disconcerting extent... especially as I'd never met another individual who swore as consistently... and with such bravura... as he did. His most eloquent and passionate use of profanity was reserved for his partner, a little black man from the islands (the Bahamas or there about) named Griff. "Moses" got his comeuppance one night when after getting paid we all ended up in a bar where Griff and he engaged in a competition downing shots of rum... the loser to pay. In spite of his admirable height and heft, rum was like mother's milk to little Griff who ended up drinking "Moses" under the table... where he literally passed out and spent the rest of the evening.

I really enjoyed this. Like a mini short story.

[ftil]

Considering that I have been painting nudes for some time, I've somewhat shied away from posting these considering the wrong ideas some have concerning nudity in art. I can't say I ever got much response when I did post my work here one way or the other, on the other hand... I have recently been showing a number of the works at a local gallery and university art department.

LOL! Nudity is beautiful but you have a such a bad taste of artists who perverted nudity.
But I understand considering your age……

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

LOL! Nudity is beautiful but you have a such a bad taste of artists who perverted nudity.
But I understand considering your age……

I love when someone completely insults someone else and then adds an emoticon as if to say, "hey, I was just kidding," when everyone knows they weren't

[stlukesguild]

I have "bad taste" in artistic nudity I take to mean that I actually like a number of Modern and even Contemporary artists who have employed the nude. Perverts such as:

Gustav Klimt (Click small images for full-sized image):



Amedeo Modigliani:



Henri Matisse:



Pierre Bonnard:



Balthus (Balthasar Klossowski):



Pablo Picasso:



Max Beckmann:



Romare Bearden:



George Tooker:



Peter Blake:



Niel Welliver:



William Beckman:



and undoubtedly the worst of all is that degenerate, Lucian Freud:



Of course, I suspect that what ftil means by "perverted nudity" is any use of nudity that suggests the least erotic or sexual content... as if there was none of this in the masterpieces of nude art created by the old masters:

Michelangelo:



Titian:



Veronese:



Peter Paul Rubens:



Boucher:



Eugene Delacroix:



Anders Zorn:



Rodin:



and Degas:



Of course I am in full agreement with the great art historian, Sir Kenneth Clark, who suggested:

"... the human body is rich in associations, and when it is turned into art, these associations are not entirely lost. It is ourselves and arouses memories of all the things we wish to do with ourselves; and first of all we wish to perpetuate ourselves... it is necessary to labor the obvious and say that no nude, however abstract, should fail to rouse in the spectator, some vestige of erotic feeling, even though it be only the faintest shadow, and if it does not do so, it is bad art and false morals. The desire to grasp and be united with another human body is so fundamental a part of our nature, that our judgment of what is known as "pure form" is inevitably influenced by it; and one of the difficulties of the nude as a subject for art, is that these insticts cannot lie hidden... but are dragged into the foreground, where they risk upsetting the unity of responses from which a work of art derives its independent life. Even so, the amount of erotic content a work of art can hold... is very high. The temple sculptures of tenth-century India are an undisguised exaltation of physical desire, yet they are great works of art..."

But perhaps ftil is too old to remember any of this.

[ftil]

I have "bad taste" in artistic nudity I take to mean that I actually like a number of Modern and even Contemporary artists who have employed the nude.

I didn't expect such a fast response. You have a short memory as we had several discussions where I expressed my thoughts about ugliness of art you have chosen.

Of course, I suspect that what ftil means by "perverted nudity" is any use of nudity that suggests the least erotic or sexual content... as if there was none of this in the masterpieces of nude art created by the old masters:

Hmm.....where did I expressed my disapproval of great masters you posted?
Poor attempt to turn everything upside down. I was talking about ugly art.

Of course I am in full agreement with the great art historian, Sir Kenneth Clark, who suggested:
But perhaps ftil is too old to remember any of this.

LOL! After reading his words I wouldn't waste my time to read more….You too much depend what others say to defend yourself.

Sadly, you still don’t understand my point…after many months and many discussions.

You have posted again a few painters........Let's look at beauty of art of your favorites.



Balthus, Guitar Lesson, 1934,




Balthus



or another your favorite........




Egon Schiele, A woman nude body





Egon Schiele, Masturbation 2

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I think you need to use more emoticons, ftil. They really enhance your point!

[stlukesguild]

mm.....where did I expressed my disapproval of great masters you posted? Poor attempt to turn everything upside down. I was talking about ugly art.

Somehow I don't think I'd want you defining what art is or is not "ugly". Certainly there is art that is "ugly"... and yet aesthetically "beautiful"... that which was later referred to as the "sublime":











More toward our own time, that which was once deemed "sublime" often became known under the name "expressionism". The themes were often the same: an art which explores horror, pain, angst, ugliness... the most intense of human emotions. Or perhaps you notion of art is that it should only explore that which is pretty and fluffy?



A painting such as Edvard Munch's Madonna is not pretty... but it is an aesthetically powerful work that explores the artist's own fears of sexuality and its links with Tuberculosis and venereal diseases that were rampant in the late 19th/early 20th century.

Neither does Egon Schiele offer a candy-coated view of the world. As might be expected of a Viennese artist, he was well acquainted with many of the ideas related to sexuality and angst that were circulating among Viennese artists and intellectuals. He was also cognizant of the hypocritical nature of the view of sex among the Viennese middle-class who expected men to be sexually experienced... through prostitutes or their servants, while demanding that women remain ever virginal. The very idea that women might have sexual desires was considered outrageous and blasphemous.

Schiele offered a view of women as femme-fatales and vampires... seductive... and yet dangerous and reeking of death.



In a painting like Death and the Maiden, Schiele explores an old Germanic theme linking death and beauty... death and sex. The subject was one employed by Franz Schubert in both one of his best known lieder... and a late string quartet... composed as he was aware of his own impending early demise... due to syphilis.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoZJkkWX8Yw

Yes... Schiele could offer a view of sexuality that was disturbing... angst-laden... dangerous... such as the images you posted. But he could also offer a view of sexuality that was turbulent and passionate:



His works could even be quite sensitive and touching... when portraying his own beloved wife:



Balthus was considered by many to have been one of the greatest figurative painters of the 20th century. Early in his career he was associated with the Surrealists, and like them, he sought to outrage the bourgeois sensibilities. A good many of his earlier paintings were blatantly blasphemous and pornographic. The painting you posted above, The Guitar Lesson, succeeded on both levels. The work was clearly a disturbingly sexual parody of Enguerrand Quarton's La Pietà de Villeneuve-lès-Avignon:



If you knew your art history as well as you think you do, you would know that Balthus later repudiated these early juvenile attempts to shock. When the director of MoMA, Alfred Barr, mentioned that he wished to display Balthus' painting, The Street... but could not... due to a certain overtly sexual detail, Balthus offered to repaint the offending passage, and Barr accepted his offer:



Balthus is most known and admired for his classically constructed compositions, his marvelous handling of color and paint, and the fresco-like surfaces of his canvases. The most admired paintings by Balthus look like this:







The second painting by Balthus that you posted above, The Chamber, is certainly one of his finer... and best known works. As with many of his paintings, it deals with the anxieties of adolescence... the period of transition from innocent childhood... to knowing adulthood... and all that entails. In The Chamber, a golem-like figure throws back the curtains exposing an adolescent girl lost in her dreams... perhaps of a nascent erotic nature. In many other paintings of the period, he presents adolescent girls as clearly far more knowing that their male counterparts. In this game, it is clearly the girl... seated like a queen on her throne... as opposed to the boy... uncomfortably balanced on his stool... who holds the winning cards:



After reading his words I wouldn't waste my time to read more….You too much depend what others say to defend yourself.

Oh please... this from the woman who continually sites a bunch of psycho-babble writers in attempting to interpret art.

[ftil]

If you knew your art history as well as you think you do, you would know that Balthus later repudiated these early juvenile attempts to shock. When the director of MoMA, Alfred Barr, mentioned that he wished to display Balthus' painting, The Street... but could not... due to a certain overtly sexual detail, Balthus offered to repaint the offending passage, and Barr accepted his offer:

Thanks for good laughter. You know very well that I am not an art teacher and I don’t have any desire to become as such. I would stop loving art. I don’t deepened on art scholars as you do. But I love art and beauty and I love art scholars who have brilliant mind and rich soul that appreciate beauty.

Oh please... this from the woman who continually sites a bunch of psycho-babble writers in attempting to interpret art.

You need to show me where I said it. LOL!

I never interpret art and I said it several times......but you ignore it as usual. It is you who made assumptions about artist’s intentions.......and I am sure that you believe that it is true.

Second, it was you who tried to support your argument about sexuality in Hindu temple by bringing Freud. Hey, you may benefit if you study what projection means…you may get rid of your bad habit of projecting your issues upon others.

Finally, you know very well that I choose teachers and scholars from whom I want to learn. You have quoted Sir Kenneth Clark twice in this thread. It sounds that he is an ultimate authority for you to follow. As I said after reading his few words, I wouldn't waste my time.

[mona amon]

StLukes, I liked all the paintings you posted, except the one by William Beckman. To me it looks like an uninteresting painting of a not particularly beautiful or particularly ugly woman. What am I missing?

[ftil]

Originally posted by stlukesguild

The painting you posted above, The Guitar Lesson, succeeded on both levels. The work was clearly a disturbingly sexual parody of Enguerrand Quarton's La Pietà de Villeneuve-lès-Avignon:
The work was clearly a disturbingly sexual parody of Enguerrand Quarton's La Pietà de Villeneuve-lès-Avignon.

I was quite intrigued what you wrote about “Guitar Lesson” as a sexual parody and I did search what others have to say about it.

The most controversial of his works is the painting titled “The Guitar Lesson” (see fig.1) which was one of his first five works he exposed in the Gallery Pierre in Paris in 1934 during his first solo exposition. The painting scandalized the public and the French media showed no mercy. He was generally accused of being obsessed with sexual perversity. One of the strongest statements came from Gaston Poulin[6] who named the artist a fanatic nymphomaniac. Furthermore, he described his style as naïve and crude portraying Balthus as the cruelest painter than Goya and Rouault. This particular painting is rarely shown and at the present it is in the hands of a privet collector. Whenever it was exposed, even the first time, it was presented mostly in separate rooms covered with the curtains just for “special” public to see. For forty years Balthus did not wanted this painting to be exposed or printed because as he himself explained from fear of the public misunderstanding of his controversial piece. The close examination of this particular artwork might vaguely respond why would people be offended to such degree by this image. Certainly, it would not be exaggeration to say that this image represents the zenith of his provocative artistic perversity.

Many artists are trying to surround themselves with the mist of mystery in order to attract the public interest in their creative efforts[7] and Balthus was a master of it. He never gives any explanation why he does what he does. That is why so much curiosity surrounds him. To criticize his artwork by the imagery would be too easy and unfortunately many critics do it. Before judging his paintings positively or negatively one needs to focus on deeper study of his artwork because in Balthus case each element of the image tells a story, understanding of which depends on how far we are prepared intellectually to dissect the hidden meanings. “The Guitar Lesson” depicts the moment of sadistic violence executed on the innocent female child by her guitar teacher. The child is lying on the teacher’s knees in the position of Pieta[8] suggesting the death Jesus reincarnated in the girl’s denuded figure. The naked body of the child is smoothly transferred symbolically into the erotic guitar on which the teacher is playing the sadistic notes of erotic education. It looks like the child is forced to play hesitantly with the partially denuded sensually erected breast of the teacher. Looking at the Balthus study sketches done for this painting, it becomes clear that he wanted to paint himself as a teacher but probably he realized that such scene would not be acceptable for any public display. It would be too personal and too revealing of his somehow overloaded with sexual fantasies mind. That is why he decided to replace himself with a woman. It probably appeared to Balthus safer to depict lesbian sodomy rather than to use the mixed genders. However, he could not refuse himself the pleasure to portray at least his face in the corps of the woman teacher. Comparing the teacher’s facial futures with the Heathcliff face from “The Cathy’s Toilet,” (see. fig.2) artwork where Balthus portrayed himself as a Heathcliff and his future wife[9] as a Cathy, the two principal characters of his favor book“Wuthering Heights,” the resemblance of the two faces is unquestionable. Furthermore, his sketches (see fig. 3) for the artwork clearly confirm that. The teacher’s right hand is squeezing the girl’s hair lock as the guitar neck and with her left hand she is pulling the imaginary strings in the child’s pubic area. The almost feinted girl gives impression of being entirely submitted to her teacher’s erotic game. Her face projects evident signs of the total subjection to the sadistic sexual sodomy of her innocence. The child’s right hand partly reposing on the floor is touching the guitar neck lying on the parquet forming a triangle suggesting the pubic area. The instrument noise hole is symbolizing the loss of innocence by the girl. The colors[10] of the child’s clothing are also symbols of the transition from the state of innocence to the state of impurity of experienced sexual pleasures. The vertical lines on the wallpaper suggest the cage of immorality to which each female child will eventually be subjected. The green color of the lines symbolizes the freshness of the girl’s femininity. The piano situated on the left side of the painting suggests much more elaborated erotic initiation in the near future when the girl would be a woman.[11] It is really fascinating artwork executed with simplicity and sincere adoration of innocent purity of the childish femininity. This painting is mentioned in many publications as a legendary probably because of its provocative content. Balthus will never again be so open to expose his explicit interiority to the exterior world. This artwork forces us to recognize that we all have a room for provocative drastic perversity and only by pure hypocritical social attitude some of us find paintings like this drastically shocking.

After his questionable experiences with “The Guitar Lesson” painting Balthus elaborated his provocative attitude by painting the adoration of childish femininity using rather poetic eroticism.

Most scholars recognized the particularity of the subjects of his artistic quest and also his artistic greatness and individuality, while others see rather just the obsessive pedophiliac character and mediocrity of it. His artwork is certainly controversial according to the contemporary social fragility towards such delicate issues as a depiction of the sexual innocence of the children, especially young girls.

Balthus was one of those artists whose persona had extremely rich inner world filled up with elaborated perverse fantasy.

Through his art he was trying to prolong the memories of his own childhood and all his childish erotic fantasies. Balthus knew that each of us has hidden room of perversity locked in our minds against any intrusion of the socio-hypocritical order and with his art he would nourish the hunger of these rooms with his provocative imagery. At the end, art is at its best when it provokes our senses.
http://pijet.com/2008/06/16/the-ador...uss-paintings/

I wouldn't agree with last paragraph. From psychological point of view, an adult man who is preoccupied with his own childish memories and erotic fantasies indicates mental and emotional immaturity. I would argue that each of us has a hidden room for perversity that is room for pedophilia. Finally, since the author said that Balthus never has given any explanation why he did what he did.....we can only make assumptions. Therefore, the image is worth more than thousands of words.

[stlukesguild]

StLukes, I liked all the paintings you posted, except the one by William Beckman. To me it looks like an uninteresting painting of a not particularly beautiful or particularly ugly woman. What am I missing?

That reproduction... the best available on the net (good reproductions of contemporary work is often difficult to find due to issues of copyright and the desire of galleries to maintain control over images by artists they represent) is undoubtedly not the finest. I have seen the particular painting... a portrait of the artist's wife... several times in the collection of the Hirshhorn Museum in Washington DC. The painting is rendered in an exquisitely polished manner. It is at once "painterly"... and yet the sense of detail and the polished surface are stunning. I am reminded of Ingres. The color is equally exquisite. The background... which appears as little more than a muddy brown in the reproduction, in real life reveals layers of color. One especially notices the subtle mauve or lavender beneath the surface color... which contrasts the warm flesh tones beautifully.