Dannon Rhudy on sun 3 aug 97
There is an artist who lives in this area, a woman in her 80's,
I would guess. She is a painter, self-taught but in no way naive.
For whatever reason she has taken to visiting me from time to time
at the studio; I return these visits when I am able - she lives
alone, well out in the country. She talks very little, does a lot
of work taking care of her place, paints...
She is an accumulator, and when she visits me she brings small
items of one kind or another that she believes might make an
interesting addition to my work, or that might interest me in some
way. The last time I saw her, she handed me a half-dozen pages
torn from a magazine, said "you might like to look at this". The
magazine turned out to be a l955 issue of AMERICAN ARTIST. The
part she thought would interest me was an article by a painter
who used engobes and oxides to paint on pots. I thanked her, set
them aside to read later. The painted pots article was ok. What
was really more interesting was what appeared to be a sort of
editorial or comment page by someone named Taubes. The article
was about critics and their penchants and capabilities - or lack
thereof. He said, in part: "Whereas it seems only natural that
the critic by trade, having become, in the course of his routine,
desensitized toward art..." (at this point I could feel my mouth
stretching into an involuntary smile ). However, he
continued:"...what excuse can there be for the incompetence of
painters as judges of art?" His contention was that artists are no
better critics than anyone else, in their own field or that of
others. He inserted some quotes of his own, which I hereby
reproduce:
Said Michaelangelo of Titian: "It's a shame that the Venetian has
not learned the basic principals of drawing."
Delacroix on Michaelangelo: "When he was making an arm or a leg,
it seems as if Michaelangelo were thinking only of that arm or
leg and was not giving the slightest consideration to the way it
related with the action of the picture as a whole." He added:
"The least of the ancients has infinitely more knowledge than
there is in the wole work of Michaelangelo. He did not know a
single one of the feelings of man, nor one of his passions."
William Blake: "The colors are always wrong with Titian and
Correggio, Rubens and Rembrandt. Till we have got rid of them we
shall never equal Michaelangelo, Raphael, Durer."
Hogarth of Sir Joshua Reynolds: "...why, the other day he offered
a hundred pounds for a painting I would not have in my cellar."
Boucher, to his pupil Fragonard:"When in Italy, you are going to
see the works of Raphael: I tell you in confidence as a friend: if
you take him seriously, you are lost!"
Michaelangelo on Van Eycks (and other Flemings): "These pictures
have neither art nor reason, neither symmetry nor proportion;...
in short, [it is]...without power and without distinction."
Berlioz on Bach: "When I was in Petersburg, they played in my honor
Bach's triple concerto. I don't think they knew how it mortified
me."
Hugo Wolfe on Brahms: "True he could never rise above the mediocre,
but such hollowness, such mousy obsequiousness as in the E minor
symphony had never been yet revealed" (this of Brahms' last,
perhaps best, symphony).
And, finally: when Chopin received Schumann's Arabesque dedicated
to him, he looked over the score and all he had to say was "Don't
the Germans have a beautiful way of printing music!"
Don Jones on mon 4 aug 97
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>.what excuse can there be for the incompetence of
>painters as judges of art?" His contention was that artists are no
>better critics than anyone else, in their own field or that of
>others. He inserted some quotes of his own, which I hereby
>reproduce:
>
He is right of course.
I think you can compile a list of artists who were defending those who were
derided by everone else until time proved them right.
My argument about such generalizations about artists is that they are like
most people in some ways. There are alot of outspoken airheads,
underspoken airheads, quite geniuses, loud geniuses, artists who shouldn't
talk or write about anybody, and artists who should be writing about art
rather than making art, wonderful people, sad people, happy people,sick
people. Above all they are curious and creative and very little holds them
down especially criticism.
Don Jones
| |
|
