Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Our greatest living artist
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2
Message
Posted
I wonder what Robert Florczak would say about that?
https://realistart.wordpress.com/2016/08/10/is-modern-art-really-so-bad/
Posted
Thats an incredibly sweeping statement...didnt hear the programme I was deep in north Wales country side drawing owls in a rescue centre....will post pics in a min.
Personally I do like David HockneyI think you actually need to go and see his paintings in a gallery to appreciate them. Its a subjective issue we all like different things. Who made that statement David and what prog was it on I will try and find it to have a listen.
Posted
The comment was from Lord Bragg chief naso-in-residence of the BBC in a programme called Matter of the North at 9 am. The prog was good, but I coughed up my bacon sandwich when he said that. Personally, and it is very personal I know, give me Vettriano any day, any day! I see little in the prints I have seen of Hockney and personally think he's taking the mick. On the other hand I was at a recent local exhibition of JV's work and it is simply superb, rich colour and deep dark stories.
D
Posted
If I said what I thought of some of that, we should fall out.
it's pointless though to compare Vettriano to Hockney - I don't think the former deserves some of the snobbish dismissal that's come his way, but he doesn't paint the world as it is, or try to: he paints a vision of it frozen in a time that never was. He may do it well, but that's not what artists are supposed to be doing - even granted painting the real world sets up more questions than it can ever even begin to answer. Hockney interprets and celebrates what's there - he's not an escapist, nor a slavish realist. That doesn't mean I like his work, necessarily - it varies.
Vettriano paints the unreal in a realistic technique (provided you leave certain questions to one side - like how his couple dancing on the sands could actually have done that, and still left no footprints even if they could have done: it's a picture that makes no sense even in its own terms).
As to whether Hockney is our greatest living artist - well, there's not a huge amount of competition at the moment, is there? It's a large claim to make, and in many ways it's a meaningless statement anyway - a journalistic comment: a novelist, which Bragg was, should know better.
http://www.isleofwightlandscapes.net
http://www.wightpaint.blogspot.co.uk
Edited
by RobertJones
Posted
Thank you Pat for pointing out the URL of Florczak's talk, I think all our contributors should read it, I certainly agree with it wholeheartedly.
David, I think you do write to draw attention to the term "greatest living artist", society today seems to imagine that all human endeavour can be summed up as some kind of competitive examination. Individual choices and preferences are ignored and all fields of endeavour are regarded as some kind of knockout competition with one person always coming to the top. Television abounds with such programs.
I'm sure we all adhere to that wonderful French expression (translated) "each to his own".
John
Posted
To call such a talented painter's work 'tat' is indeed a short, sharp and bold statement. I was simply breathless when I visited his 'A Bigger Picture' exhibition at the RA a few year's back, totally stunning and the commitment required to produce so many canvasses on that scale at his age and all on location is testament to this great British painter. For my money DH is the best living painter by a mile, go and take a look at one of his exhibitions and then say it's 'tat'.
Posted
Darn your Chinese burns Robert...
I hear your points but still cannot agree. WHY cannot a painter make his / her images look as if they were painted under a 40 watt bulb? As for a world of fantasy, Picasso? Dali? Did Dali EVER see melting watches or horses with long legs? Did Lowry ever see such people? Did Van Gogh ever see whirling stars (mind altering substances excepted)? All artists take licence do they not, in order to convey meaning? I dont know whether JV ever saw dancers on sand or whether the lack of footprints was intentional or an error, but I can read into that a deep meaning...and that is the test of art in my book! Something happens between artiste and medium that creates something new...and I think JV has that.
Now, I understand your points Robert, but will have to stay away from that stick of yours. In fareness, this IS your subject and not mine, so if you say JV is not that good I must defer and simply state that I LIKE his work, good or not and will try to figure it all out.
My arm hurts...can we be mates again?
David
Showing page 1 of 2
- 1
- 2