How Picasso Effects My Art

Since I began drawing and other forms of art when I was a child, I always excelled further in cartooning than other aspects of drawing. When you’re a child, the way you portray things on paper usually looks nothing like the actual 3 dimensional figures you use as your subject, and usually this has to do with lack of skill at such an early age. What I noticed about Picasso is that although he mastered art in the classical sense of the word, he almost took a step backwards in the way he portrayed his subjects.

In my experience I’ve found that I can portray my subjects in a realistic fashion, and draw them with as much 3D detail as possible, but that isn’t the way I enjoy portraying them. Instead I’d rather be abstract in my drawings, and instead use the story itself to make the drawings interesting to the viewer. Obviously the difference between Picasso and me is that Picasso didn’t have a series of pictures and a written story with which to guide his viewers through what he was getting at. So when we look at paintings such as Les Demoiselles d’Avignon, 1907, we can’t be sure as viewers what Picasso was trying to portray through his use of cubism, but what I believe is obvious is that we aren’t supposed to be noticing the feminine body, because otherwise he would’ve just done a nude of a beautiful woman simple and plain. This painting with its abstract design forces the viewer to look at other aspects than just the people, it makes us notice the colors used, the African tribal masks on two of their faces, the Iberian styled faces of the other three, and even the colorless fruit in the middle.

It is my belief that abstract art whether it be as abstract as Picasso’s cubism, or a modern cartoon theme, can be just as effective, and maybe even more effective in some cases than Classical art. By allowing a viewer to look past the normal everyday forms they are used to, they may also begin to recognize other aspects of the things they are looking at, and this can be a very insightful way to look at things.

~Michael Someck

Rodin, The Gates of Hell, 1880-1900

Rodin's artwork is both quite peculiar and intriguing to say the least. The 15th century bronze doors depicts figures from the Old Testament. He uses the doors as an architectural device; it is like some sort of a portal to another dimension. The doors were modeled after "Dante's inferno". It is interesting how the doors never open and how the sculpture is placed in front of a concrete wall as it's backing. The tittle of the piece alone piques one's interest. The audience is captivated by the intricate sculptures carved out from the doors and it almost appears as a realistic representation of some sort of gate way. It is a very curious piece, it entices the audience to want to open the forbidden doors.

~Alexandra Sullivan

Willem de Kooning's piece "Woman I" 1950-52

Kooning's painting entitled "Woman I" is a pretty harsh representation of a woman. The woman appears to almost come out of the painting. She is drawn in such a way that makes her appear monstrous and large and as if she were almost snarling at the audience. The colors of the painting are interesting; the spill into the other colors beyond their boundaries. It eliminates composition and arrangement. It takes a sort of misogynistic view of woman.

~Alexandra Sullivan

Diego Velasquez and his rendition to infanta Margarita Theresa

Diego Rodriguez De Silva y Velasquez (June 6, 1599-August 6, 1660) was the leading artist in King Philip's IV court from the baroque period. This Spanish artist was the creator of many of the portraits of the Spanish Royal family. Many of his paintings included portraits of King Philip's "favorite" daughter, infanta Margarita Theresa. Diego Velasquez ultimate masterpiece was "Las meninas."

One of Diego Velasquez' famous painting was "Las Meninas" (maids of honor) this painting has been examined for years now and it has been difficult to examine what the specific and main subject of the painting is due to the fact that there are three possible main subjects we can see. In the center we appreciate infanta Margarita Theresa being courted by her ladies around her, we then can appreciate the artist himself Diego Velasquez in the painting to the left side and finally the King and Queen are in the middle reflected in a mirror standing as spectators. I can only think that if he painted all three then all of them are the main subjects and characters of the painting although infanta Margarita is in the middle, Diego Velasquez' intention was to include the King, Queen and himself in this painting.

This painting by Diego Velasquez is truly my favorite because of how infanta Margarita Theresa is being courted and how the painting looks like it was painted in an instant as if it was a snapshot. The interesting points in this painting were also the dwarf and dog painted in the court. Another point in this painting was Diego Velasquez because although this painting was not a self-portrait, it does include the paintor himself. Diego Velasquez can be seen staring directly out to the viewers however, it can somehow also represent that he was looking at the King and Queen that were outside of the picture but once painted in it they were automatically brought inside the picture space.

Margarita Theresa daughter of King Philip IV of Spain was immortalized on painting by Diego Velasquez on many occasions. King Philip IV referred to his daughter as "my joy" on his private letters. Being that Margarita Theresa was the King's favorite child he had several paintings of her, one being a self portrait of her as a child or "infanta." This portrait is truly fascinating to me, the way Diego Velasquez used the light and dark gold all over her is interesting because she seems like she's a porcelain little doll. From the way she's posing, to her hair, to her clothing, to her facial expression everything seems in place and perfect.

- Jessica Morales

Donatello's "David"

Donatello's sculpture of "David" is, to say the least, a very interesting conversation piece. It is a rendition far from what other sculptors such as Michelangelo and Gianlorenzo Bernini chose to depict many years later. It certainly brings about a different kind of aesthetic, but is not without some controversy.

Donatello sculpted "David" out of bronze during the mid 1400's, around the same time that the Medici palace in Italy was being built. It was because of this coincidence, and historical descriptions of the location of the "David", that the patron of this statue was deemed to be the Medics, a powerful and rich ruling family situated in Florence.

Looking at the bronze figure and the renditions brought to life by Michelangelo and Bernini side by side, one can note the striking differences between Donatello's and the others. Donatello's "David" features a youthful, naive, delicate, even daintily-figured boy, features associated with femininity. Some people even regard this piece as being homoerotic. The other sculptures represent David as a muscular, older, and experienced man, basically features associated with masculinity. This is where a heated discussion arises in respect to Donatello's rendition.

Taking a closer look at the bronze sculpture, one can notice features that were traditionally associated with sculptures of women: the contrapposto stance, the positioning of his wrist against his hip, the shape of his stomach and the large size of his buttocks. Some of its characteristics can be attributed to ancient Greek and Roman art, but its effeminate qualities cannot easily be overlooked. The absence of clothing other than his headgear and footwear is also somewhat bizarre, as it does not make any sense. Looking at the "David" from a modern-day point of view would definitely render it somewhat erotic. If one concentrates on what David is standing on, one can tell it is the head and helmet of the just decapitated Goliath. The helmet features two long wings, one of which seems like it is working itself up towards David's groin.

Some scholars conclude that Donatello was in fact a homosexual who had several romantic liaisons with his young, male apprentices, and used "David" as a way to express his sexuality through his artwork. But one has to look at the time period and place that "David" is from: 15th century Italy, when homosexuality was illegal and punishable by law. And the fact that this was displayed in not only the courtyard of the Medici palace but also the Vecchio palace after the Medicis were exiled from Florence does not support the argument. A safer assumption (for Donatello) would be that he was either emphasizing homosocial values, the importance of relationships between men, or simply that Donatello was exercising artistic freedom, and creating something that was not seen before in this time period.


~ Chase Melgarejo

Piet Mondrian born in Central Holland in 1872 and lived there for the first 8 years of his life. His father was a gifted draftsman and amateur artist. His uncle Frits Mondrian was a self taught painter who was commercially successful. Piet showed potential as a great artist from when he was young. His father got him drawing lessons while his uncle taught him the basics of painting. When he was older he got a teaching license like his father wanted but decided to become an artist instead. As an artist he joined many different societies and exhibited his work for the first time when he was 21. At the age of 31 he won his first prize from the "Arti et Amicitae Society". In 1910 Mondrian saw an exhibit by Picasso and decided to move to Paris to study cubism. This influenced his Artwork greatly.

Piet Mondrian is known as the father of graphic design. He was an important contributor to the De Stijl art movement, which was a Dutch artist movement started in 1917. He was the inventor of Neo-Plasticism which is translated as "new art" because of its new pure form. His art work consisted mainly of white backgrounds with black vertical and horizontal lines to create and grid and then the use of the three primary colors. He showed the world that less is more. This is a concept that is very important in graphic design. He showed that minimal composition made up of basic colors like red, yellow and blue with simple geometric shapes can be very influential. As a Graphic design major this concept has been one that I have been dealing a lot with. There is a very thin line between to be careful of when designing. You want your work to be simple but at the same time it has to be powerful!

When coming to New York after the start world war II Mondrian was influenced by the city's architecture and structure. His final painting Boogie Woogie Broadway was influenced by the city life and its constant motion. It is said that the yellow is representative of the yellow city cabs. It was also inspired by jazz music that Mondrian was attracted to when he came to New York. The colors and the balance made the painting very unique and impressionable.

In my color and design class we spoke about him and had to try to create our own design using tertiary colors which had to relate back to his work. His artwork is a nice way to study colors and the relationship between them.

Sheryl Blachman

by Loksze Wong

Leonardo da Vinci’s mural painting “the Last Supper” is a well-known Christian work of art. It is described as “Final meal shared by Jesus Christ and his disciples in Jerusalem during or just before Passover, in the course of which Jesus instituted the Christian Eucharist.” (The Columbia Encyclopedia) The painting illustrates the situation when Jesus and His twelve apostles are having dinner together, and it reveals the relationship between each one of them. The dinner took place right before the date of Jesus’s crucifixion; and the meal was an anticipation of Jesus’s death and of the eschatological banquet, which the bread symbolizes Jesus’s body and the wine symbolizes Jesus’s blood, is to remember the Lord, Jesus Christ. The Christian text, the Biblestates a prediction about Jesus that He will die for the world. In addition, it also contains a record of Jesus’s sacrifice for everyone in the world, including His apostles, sinful and flawed people. According to J. Carter Brown, the director of National Gallery of Art in Washington, “His (Leonardo) innovation lies in the intensity of psychological analysis of each participant in the drama” (Studies for the Last Supper, 9). Therefore, the Last Supper is a significant work of art because of the exploration of human psychology in painting, artistic appreciation, historical importance, and religious purposes.

The origin of this piece of art was in Milan, Italy, and it was placed on a wall of the refectory of the Convent Dominican friars at Santa Maria delle Grazie. It has become one of the major masterpieces of Italian Renaissance Art. The Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Olivetti, Carlo De Benedetti stated that the Last Supper is “a work whose significance has grown over the centuries, which has become…one of the highest expressions of universal art, almost one of the symbols, or the symbol, of the magnitude of the image of man bequeathed to the future by the Renaissance” (Benedetti, 8). The Renaissance was a period of great cultural change and achievement in art, starting from the end of the 13^th century to the 16^th century. The “rebirth of Art Science… represents the pinnacle of artistic achievement, revived and confidently executed after a thousand years in the wilderness.” (Italian Renaissance Art) Some influential artists of the Italian Renaissance are Giotto, Botticelli, Donatello, Masaccio, Fra Angelico, Piero Della Francesca, Michelangelo, Raphael, and Leonardo da Vinci.

The work of art, the Last Supper “was made using experimental pigments directly on the dry plaster wall and unlike frescos, where the pigments are mixed with the wet plaster” (JayDax Computer Information Centre). It measures 450 × 870 centimeters (15 feet × 29 feet) and covers the end of the wall of the dining hall at the monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan, Italy. The artist used a medium containing oil and varnish. The wall was damp and the painting was deteriorating once he painted it. Yet, Leonardo da Vinci’s sfumato technique was represented in the painting through the use of creating atmosphere and depth which developed the dimensions of both the environment and people. On the other hand, the fresco takes place where Jesus has the last supper with His apostles when His apostles are in disbelief. Leonardo painted with details, such as the food, cups, glasses, wine, plates, light, the positions and the expressions of people, etc. The people who were portrayed in the painting are Bartholomew, James Minor, Andrew, Peter, Judas, John, Jesus, Thomas, James Major, Philip, Matthew, Thaddeus, and Simon the Canaanite. In the celebration of the eve of Passover, Jesus and His twelve apostles sat beside the table and had a dinner together to celebrate the important day. The thirteen people gathering to eat together was their last supper and it “represented the moment of communion, a moment of calm in which each apostle might wish to sit alone with his thoughts” (Clark, 19). At the table Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me- one who is earing with me.” (Mark 14:18) “Immediately this row of quiet individuals is unified by emotion.” (Clark, 19 ). Another technique was used throughout the painting:

‘the variety of gesture which Leonardo has given to the disciples, and the way in which the effect of these gestures is enhanced by contrast; how, for example, the rough impetuous Peter, pugnaciously eager to declare his innocence, contrasts with the resigned St John, content to sit quietly, because he knows that no one will suspect him, and how St Peter’s hand, forming a bridge between the heads of St John and Judas, underlines the contrasts between innocence and villainy’ (Clark, 20)

As Jesus told His disciples that one of them will betray him even though He did not say directly that the man would be Judas, all the apostles did not know who in the group will betray Jesus which creates a suspicious atmosphere; the human feelings and emotion were portrayed in the Last Supper.