Then I made a broader connection... Other art, impressionist, medieval, etc etc.. doesn't all speak to me. Yes certain pieces do but that's just like modern art isn't it. However I don't dismiss the other works as "not art" or capable of being done my a three year old. Perhaps it is because even though I may not LOVE all Manet's work I still respect that he was an accomplished painter... he had talent.. and did things in fact a three year old could not do!
So in conclusion... Modern and other art have the key similarity that yes CERTAIN pieces do REALLY stick out and speak to me. however other art that does not speak to me I do not dismiss. Is this fair to modern art? Perhaps not. But it is the way i see it at least.
Speaking of three year olds... the little children here that get so wrapped up for the cold by the parents are JUST hilarious. Some poor children cannot move their arms and they just stick out at right angles and waddle around. And this is very tempting to me.. who sorely wishes to push one of these children over just because they would bounce and be unable to get up... before you think I'm COMPLETELY evil realize these would only be children with incredible amounts of padding so really the bounce wouldn't hurt them. But it would be terribly funny. Ok maybe i'm a bit evil... I haven't tried this in real life as I would not like to be arrested and deported.
Obviously my maternal instincts have not quite solidified. Oh well I've got time :-D
-T
1 comment:
Shades of "A Chirstmas Story" and Randy in the snow. I agree with what you say about modern art. Some of it COULD be done by three year olds. Interesting you mention Manet. I never particularly cared for him, but he's not in the "not art" category. It's just not to my taste. Now, Monet, on the other hand, SINGS to me. And I am blown away by Durer and Hieronimus Bosch. Timeless.
BTW, I think I may have link 17 and one month old Liza Minelli. Disgusting how much natural talent some people are given! [Best foot forward.]
Post a Comment