You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The artist was in her X period...
Art critic is a job and I assume they have knowledge about art but for sure whatever they say does effect the painting and the (old) master. Look at the old paintings hundreds of years old, all of a sudden those living today know how that painter felt at the specific moment he was painting a certain "masterpiece".
Art for sure is personal, you feel it or not, same counts for writers and if it comes to P Coelho he's by far not that great to me as said. I am also disappointed by his book I bought, but that seems to be typicall for literature.
🍀❤️
@wakeupkitty
Well, I suppose they can understand techniques and styles, but you also need discernment. Let's think of Van Gogh, one of the most emblematic cases of an artist whose work only became valuable after his death. Was it bad luck, or did the critics simply not like him? Then there's Picasso, who was famous during his lifetime, and who, in my opinion, is less deserving of credit than other artists. But as you say, art is subjective, although it seems to me that it's a narrative used to launch certain artists to fame. As an aside, in Paraguay, according to gossip, you can't achieve success without being gay. But hey, maybe it's just a coincidence!
Bueno, supongo que pueden entender técnicas y estilos, pero también se necesita discernimiento. Pensemos en Van Gogh, uno de los casos más emblemáticos de un artista cuya obra solo adquirió valor después de su muerte. ¿Fue mala suerte, o simplemente no les gustó a los críticos? Luego está Picasso, famoso en vida, y que, en mi opinión, merece menos reconocimiento que otros artistas. Pero como dices, el arte es subjetivo, aunque me parece que es una narrativa utilizada para catapultar a la fama a ciertos artistas. Por cierto, en Paraguay, según los rumores, no se puede triunfar sin ser gay. ¡Pero bueno, tal vez sea solo una coincidencia!