personally I prefer the Kandinsky but not because of the serenity in the Monet or the color of the Kandinsky or any of the reasons mentioned. (btw art is never completely comprehensible - if I were to completely understand the wonder of Beethoven or Monet or Michaelangelo or Jet Li it would cease to be art and become science. that is facts and bits of knowledge put together to form a cohesive whole. By the same token art must always be mostly accessible or it ceases to be art and becomes insanity.) I like the Kandinsky because of the irony of the title. The painting is not "Towards Abstraction" it is abstraction. The Monet is a masterpiece because of its focus on serenity. The story is told of a world-famous French artist (I forget the name) who towards the end of his life got arthritis in his hands, contorting his fingers into impossible shapes. Yet he still painted hours each day, forcing the paintbrush into his fingers and willing the pictures into shape, when asked why he put himself through such pain he said "Pain leaves, the beauty remains"
The Kandinsky is a masterpiece because of its composition; the marriage of color and shape, of line makes it intriguing. I like it because of its incomprehensibility, because of its formed shapelessness. It reminds of of a corncupia.
2 comments:
Your post looked lonely without any comments....So, I'm leaving one. This has nothing to do with the paintings, but have you heard from Nehemiah recently? He got this amazingly sweet car. Peach tried to get him to let her drive it, but yeah, that didn't go over too well. Ok, so now your post doesn't look so lonely.
Hi! Hope you don't mind- I found your blog and this caught my attention.
Have you ever heard of synesthesia? It's a psych condition where senses blend and affect each other. Kandinsky was synesthetic. So was Listz (His work entitled "Blue" because the key of C# seemed blue to him.) You should look into it. It's pretty cool.
Have a lovely day, Josh!
Post a Comment