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.

Interactive Art – The Role of the Spectator in Marcel Duchamp’s Étant donnés

by Dinah Han

We began this course by looking at artwork the beginning of the 14^th century and the various Byzantine and Greek inspired pieces that were coming out of a heavily Christianity inspired society. Most of these works were commissioned by the church for artists of this time were looked upon as skilled craftsmen rather than creative masters. The artists were not able to afford their painting materials and so depended upon their wealthy patrons for not only monetary assistance but also guidelines for exactly what kind of art they were expecting. In a sense, this is the highest level a spectator, or any person that is not the artist himself, can have on a piece. They are the ones dictating how a piece should look like and what the subject matter of the piece should be while the artist is the creative vehicle into which this vision can come to a tangible fruition. As the necessity for these patrons decreased as time passed and artists were viewed with greater esteem (therefore no longer needing the money of others to produce art), the role of the spectator in art also began to change.

Artists take into account of the spectator to varying degrees. It is not so easy to tell when an artist is not mindful of the viewer of his paintings. It is really when an artist consciously produces his art with the idea of the spectator in mind that it is most obvious. What made me think about this concept was as the course entered the era of the modern art. It seems that one of the greatest trends in modern art is the artist’s hypersensitive awareness of the people seeing their work. This seems to be none truer than with the Dada movement and its most famous contributor, Marcel Duchamp. Duchamp has many works that seems to directly call into question what the viewer is thinking or feeling when they see the piece. For example, when he submitted the toilet as a sculptural piece titled The Fountain he was trying to ask the spectator what they thought of the urinal and left it up to the viewer to decided whether this was even art or not. In Duchamp’s final artwork, Étant donnés, he sets up an exhibit where people must walk up to a door and look through a peephole to be able to see the piece. Not only does the viewer have to physically look through a hole to see this exhibit, but it has been said that no photograph can ever do this piece justice.

The skin of the woman figure in the tableau was made of pig skin and should therefore give the illusion of human skin. The fact that this naked woman was made to look as human-like as possible and the fact that a person has to look through a peephole to see her must give the viewer a sense of voyeurism. I researched this exhibit over the internet and came across many pictures taken of this piece. The closest and most clear images I saw, however, were from the videos I found of this tableau were from videos taken of the piece. Most of them start with the camera focused on the door rather than the scene with the woman. Then, you can almost imagine yourself taking those steps to get closer to that ancient looking door with two tiny peepholes bored in it. Finally, once the camera does look through the hole to see what lies on the other side, there is almost a sense of frustration for you are never able to see as much of the scene as you want to. Whether it is due to the small size of the peepholes, or the fact that even once you get past these tiny holes, there is still another wall blocking a complete view of the tableau. The woman’s face is never visible no matter how much the video recorder tries to shift and angle their position.

Although I would never truly get a full sense of what this piece is really like until I actually visit the Philadelphia Museum of Art where this piece is located, I did feel like I got a greater sense and appreciation for the tableau than if I were just a random spectator passing by this exhibit. Not only did I have to be limited by the wall and door that all spectators of this piece have to endure, I had an added element of restriction of having to appreciate this piece through pictures and amateur videos. It is this frustration that maybe Duchamp was aiming for, especially considering the fact that this piece was highly publicized as being his final, secretive masterpiece that he only wanted to be revealed after his death. This piece is special in that the spectator plays such a large role in the viewing of this piece and it is this singular, personal experience that maybe Duchamp wanted to convey when building the, Étant donnés.

by Jennifer Stryjewski

I remember my first art history teacher's favorite artist, Leonardo da Vinci. He always had this affinity for da Vinci, which I secretly think may have spawned from sharing a first name with the Renaissance master. Now, while one must certainly have a healthy amount of respect for the da Vinci himself, I could never understand the obsession with his art. Is it the mystery of the Mona Lisa? Or the mathematical precision and mirror-like quality of The Last Supper? Maybe for these reasons or others, I find his art less than desirable. What could it be, this quality I find lacking in Da Vinci’s paintings? The only things redeeming da Vinci for me are his notebooks, which possess a rough quality to them that shows it was done by human hand and not some machine. 

While I have an appreciation for Leonardo da Vinci and the way used science, math and art in concert (the first two of which I personally have no fondness for), I must admit that I am not as drawn to his work as I am towards his contemporary, Michelangelo. First, allow me to say that I am not a sculptor, but a [painter]. Having said that, I do love his sculptures, but I find his paintings to be very exquisite in comparison to some of the other Renaissance painters, like da Vinci. The reason as to why I like Michelangelo’s art so much is because he was a sculptor, which I feel gave him a unique edge. Michelangelo’s paintings come out as much bulkier then other artisans. His human figures feel more solid, much like sculptures have to be to stand their ground and they have a presence, unlike the dainty citizens created by Rafael's design. Michelangelo's brushstrokes are also softer with a lack of sfmato and not as exact as da Vinci's, which, in my personal opinion, makes his paintings feel more real. His personal life also adds another dimension to his art. Michelangelo lived a rather tortured, melancholy existence; in his youth, he was repressed by the pope from doing the work he truly aspired to create and then in his later years as he slowly began to lose the ability to carve. These rough times may have helped him to create outstanding art, as I myself can identify, having created my best work during the lowest points of my life (which also felt therapeutic). He is also the first artist with the guts to make a self-portrait as melting skin in a church building.

Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo share much in common: they are both considered to be the masters of the Greco-Roman classics, have worked for the church as commercial artists, and faced their own hardships. Both artists have certainly created masterpieces that have withstood the centuries, but, in my eyes, the feelings that their art can elicit is what that distinguishes them. To me, Leonardo's standard is unattainable, and because of this I feel a certain coldness projected when looking at his art. In many ways da Vinci’s art can be considered perfect, but I find him lacking in emotional appeal. Thus, Michelangelo will forever be timeless, as the artist whose work can tug on my heartstrings and can intrigue my mind.

Anselm Kiefer by Marcia Carrillo

Bohemia by the Sea, by the German Neo-Expressionist artist Anselm Kiefer is a large scale landscape painting with a highly textured impasto surface. The painting is made up of two panels of equal size that are joined together to make one huge country field full of pink-orange poppies. The horizon line is extremely high, and on the right panel just above the horizon line the artist has inscribed in white paint the words Böhmen liegt am Meer (Bohemia Lies by the Sea). At the center of the composition is a country road that begins to curve just before it hits the horizon line. The road is divided by a thick line of grass and poppy flowers. The colors are muted and muddy, except for two poppies on the left hand side of the left panel that are a bright red. 

The large scale and tactile surface of the painting transports the viewer into Kiefer's dark expansive landscape. The centering of the road forces the viewer to place himself or herself directly in front of the road, and by beginning the road outside of the composition the viewer is further transported into the painting reflecting on the road that lies ahead. The muddy brown, green, and black paint dotted with the muted pink-orange poppy flowers evoke a mood of melancholy. The dark blue paint of the sky dripping over the field further adds to the overall gloominess of the composition. The two red poppy flowers on the left panel awaken memories of the lives lost during war. Since World War I red poppies have come to symbolize spilt blood on the battle field.

Anselm Kiefer has taken the title of his painting from the Austrian writer Ingeborg Bachmann's poem, by the same title, Bohemia Lies by the Sea. Kiefer's work, like Bachmann's, deals with post-World War II Germany through the themes of mourning, reflection, and remembrance. Bachmann's poem explores the fallacy behind the belief in a Utopian society. Like the idea of political and social perfection can never exist, Bohemia will never lie by the sea as it is landlocked.

Below is a copy of the poem:

http://www.readingroom.spl.org.uk/classic_poems/boll.htm

Bohemia Lies by the Sea

If houses here are green, I'll step inside a house.

If bridges here are sound, I'll walk on solid ground.

If love's labour's lost in every age, I'll gladly lose it here.

If it's not me, it's one who is as good as me.

If a word here borders on me, I'll let it border.

If Bohemia still lies by the sea, I'll believe in the sea again.

And believing in the sea, thus I can hope for land.

If it's me, then it's anyone, for he's as worthy as me.

I want nothing more for myself. I want to go under.

Under – that means the sea, there I'll find Bohemia again.

From my grave, I wake in peace.

From deep down I know now, and I'm not lost.

Come here, all you Bohemians, seafarers, dock whores, and ships

unanchored. Don't you want to be Bohemians, all you Illyrians,

Veronese and Venetians. Play the comedies that make us laugh

until we cry. And err a hundred times,

as I erred and never withstood the trials,

though I did withstand them time after time.

As Bohemia withstood them and one fine day

was released to the sea and now lies by water.

I still border on a word and on another land,

I border, like little else, on everything more and more,

a Bohemian, a wandering minstrel, who has nothing, who

is held by nothing, gifted only at seeing, by a doubtful sea,

       the land of my choice.

Ingeborg Bachmann

From Darkness Spoken: Collected Poems of Ingeborg Bachmann, translated by Peter Filkins, copyright © 2006 Zephyr Press

Class Blog: December 14, 2011

My visit to the MET was amazing. One of my favorite galleries was Art in Renaissance Venice, 1400-1515 paintings and drawing. I was able to appreciate in person Giovanni Bellini's Madonna and Child. I have to admit that the impression that one gets is overwhelming when appreciating these paintings in person; a first experience for me and one that I will never forget.

I was equally impressed with the European Sculpture and decorative arts being able to appreciate this art form in the way they were meant to be looked at or appreciated was amazing, it complemented all we learned in class about the development of these art forms. The sculptures are simply breathtaking in all aspect but specially their presence, texture and how one can interact with the art form. Another gallery within the European Sculpture and Decorative arts that I truly enjoyed was the Greek and Roman art gallery. The collection is amazing and diverse with sculptures in marble, bronze, gold and limestone to mention a few. I was most impressed with the different texture that can only be truly appreciated when standing in front of the sculpture itself i.e. AIR - Limestone (as per the Met, probably French, Roven, Jean-Pierre DeFrance, 1694-1768) in its displayed form gives an impression of dry and opaque but overwhelmingly amazing. If compared with Andromeda and the Sea Monster - Marble (Domento Guidi, 1625-1701, Italian, Rome) in its displayed form comes out as smoother, less coerced and reflecting of light around it.

My favorite part of my trip to the Met I have to say was being able to appreciate the European sculptures, simply because the feel and experience of seeing this art face to face was totally unexpected! It’s an experience I will not forget. All I could think of while looking at the sculpture and their grandeur is how much dedication, passion and love the art must have been requested from the artist to achieve such master pieces, insanely amazing. I will sure return to the Mets again and again.

 

Regards,

Yaniris Cortez

 

Readymades by Radha Ropchand

 The readymade is the term coined by Marcel Duchamp referring to manufactured objects as works of art. In class we spoke about The Fountain. The American Society of Independent Artists held an exhibition in 1917 and with a fee of $6 any work submitted would be displayed as art. Duchamp bought the urinal and turned it on a side so it wasn't functional and signed it. His work was so controversial that it was rejected, however he had anticipated the rejection. His goal was to create a piece that was so shocking that it had to be rejected. This was his way of questioning what is art.

                Another work by him that I find funny and interesting is L.H.O.O.Q. Duchamp created this piece after he returned to Paris. When Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa was stolen, there were many badly reproduced Mona Lisa's on postcards and advertising. Duchamp bought a postcard reproduction of the Mona Lisa and drew a moustache and beard on her face. Like his Fountain this was also an act of questioning what is art. Not only did he alter her image but he titled the piece L.H.O.O.Q.  which read aloud in French would phonetically sound like "she has a hot ass". Duchamp is deconstructing this famous painting and making it into a thing of ridicule.

                In both readymade pieces Duchamp was so bold and controversial that the viewer had to question whether the piece was a work of art or not. By arising this question the viewer would further have to ask themselves why or why shouldn't this piece be a work of art. The Dada movement was a movement that questioned everything about the traditional functions of society and art, and I feel that although Duchamp was not particularly a Dada artist, the controversial quality of his work was definitely outstanding.  

by Xiaoxaun Xu

David's painting "the death of Marat" is a description of historical events that the French revolutionary Marat was assassinated in bath. He uses the realistic approach to express the horror scene that Marat was just stabbed. The wound is visible clearly, and blood was pouring from his chest, but the murderer has already fled the spot. His left arm was hanging outside the tub and holds a quill pen. Another hand tightly holds a letter that the murder gave it to him "I am just too unhappy to deserve your kindness". The water in the tub dyed red and his shoulder has blood stains too. The floor has a kitchen knife stained with the blood. A wooden desk is beside the tub and shows "A Marat - David ". Square column shape wooden desk is a certain place on the picture as a memorial stone, and plays the role of stable composition. On the desk was ink, feather pen, paper money and a note Marat has just wrote that 5 francs a mother of five children, her husband gave his life for the motherland. The detail makes Marat a glorious image on the painting.

Marat’s head lay to the side and arm is hanging feebly. It looks like Michelangelo's "Pietà". Despite the loss of life consciousness, his body still has a noble beautiful. David intentionally process the upper part of the painting simple, deep and dark in order to highlight the realistic objective performance of the lower part. At the same time, strengthen the dead body prolapse feeling and this shocking outraged incident brings people a feeling of depression and oppressed in great grief. Charles Baudelaire wrote in his book "This work contains something both poignant and tender; a soul is taking flight in the chill air of this room, within these cold walls, around this cold funerary tub". In a vacant and heavy black background a beam of light from left side shine to victim’s body and face. It’s like a monument of stereo feeling and has a quiet solemn atmosphere. Caravaggio's work "Entombment of Christ" reflects The Death of Marat's drama and light. The whole picture’s tone is slant to green through a careful observe. Green is the color of peace which people like.

This painting does not have many colors and complex techniques. The concise, rigorous, clear, rational way of expression and depth, specific truly represent the detail. It all reflects David to Marat’s respect and condolences. All of these details like Balzac's novel historical and true. This painting likes a full of ghostly terror living drama. This miracle makes an outstanding work of David that no mediocrity and vulgar. At the same time, it also reflects the ideal hero spirit that people desire during the French revolution. David intentionally depicts the death of Marat as Christian saints, which makes his death abound unusual meaning. His sacrifice is to the good and for the welfare of the ordinary people.

"The death of Marat" became David's masterpiece handed down from ancient times. He uses his brushes awakened people plain simple feelings and firmness sense of justice and make Marat’s hero image live forever in the people's hearts.

Xiaoxuan Xu

Study After Velázquez, 1953 by Francis Bacon

By Pooja Sijapati

Francis Bacon paints Study After Velázquez, 1953 as one of the series of his Scream painting. Painting is of a portrait of Pope with flushed down, vibrant motion of color and a stunning facial expression. Francis bacon comes about making this painting after the famous movie still form The Battleship Potemkin 1925 by Sergei Eisenstein of the bespectacled women who is bleeding from her eyes and portrait of Pope Innocent X, 1650 by Diego Velázquez. The movie still form The Battleship Potemkin is basically a snapshot of chaos and violence, where as Diego Velázquez’s Pope Innocent X is comparatively peaceful than the movie still.  

Diego Velázquez as a young artist at the time offered himself to paint the Pope to prove his painting skills. The painting of Pope Innocent shows fine brushwork and its glossy texture, an epitome work of art. The background is red but in contrast his red robe is beautiful and velvety. Color red makes Pope look very powerful; he was aged 75 at the time. Remarkable vigor with a great capacity of work and he was also considered to have violent temper. Pope is wearing white; he is seated on a red armchair. With his fleshy cheeks and suspicious eyes starring back at the viewers. Velázquez includes his signature in the paper the pope is holding on his hand.  

As for Francis Bacon his image of the Pope is almost transparent, like a ghost. Lack of hair, head or sense of face, black eyes, and open mouth implies scream, which gives him an undead zombie façade.  Rendered and smeared in deep dark color Pope looks like he came from a horror movie. Pope is not sitting on a majestic red velvety chair neither is he placed in front of a red backdrop. It almost looks like he is planted on electric chair, going though his execution. Several beaming vertical stripes shoots out from the lower half of the body.  These two painting are in contrast with each other, Velázquez makes he pope look powerful majestic and idealized, where as Bacon strips pope down form his power and makes him look helpless.  

Death and the Matron - Shauna Tague

• I was pretty fascinated by the painting “Death and the Matron” by Hans Baldung Grien which you can find in our textbook on page 687. Both sexuality and mortality, femininity and repugnance, all are portrayed in one painting, offering very complex meanings. At this time of 16^th century Europe eroticism and sexuality in woman was coming about and had become more admired as we have seen in other paintings we have looked at around the same time period. The painting is eye catching to say the least and when I took one glance at it, it wasn't the skeleton corpse or the pale, illuminated nude body that drew my attention; it was the repulsive expression on the woman’s face that utterly captivated in a bizarre way. It’s almost a shame that this beautiful, sensual, body in such an elegant position is paired with such a horrific look on her face. The orange-yellow colors and complexion of his dead bony body evoke disgust and represent everything the matron is not. With the contrasting colors of the silky, creamy pale color of her skin to the shiny color and hard texture of the dead skeleton, it looks like evil is taking over good but I don’t think it’s that simple. The skeleton, “death”, is holding her in a rather sensual, gentle way which causes you to think that he is not there to take her or kill her but rather just be in her presence. If she didn't have such a horrific expression it would almost think the two were in a moment of passion. This painting will always beguile me and keep me wondering about its strange context and divergent colors.

DINNER TIME- Alexandra Cianci

Both Judy Chicago and Louise Bourgeois create fantastic settings for their dinner parties. These settings are awe-inspiring- each in their own way.

Judy Chicago created "The Dinner Party" in the late seventies as a celebration to great women. She shaped this dream of perpetual power of women by creating what seems to be an almost infinite form. The sheer size of the piece and how you must encounter and interact with it in space is inescapable and undeniable- it overwhelms you like the success of the women that it represents. The piece consists of a large triangular table with settings for nine hundred and ninety-nine women. Each woman's setting had an embroidered cloth as well as a floral plate and other details. Each plate's floral motif beautifully evoked core imagery and also evoked ugly responses from politicians. Everyone that viewed it had a strong feeling about it- whether negative or positive.

Louise Bourgeois’ dinner was derived from a dream as well. This dream is about a man's wife and child shredding him apart and feasting on him. Bourgeois uses real memories combined with her imagination to come up with concepts. This concept in particular creates a vulgar yet intimate setting that almost traps you at first glance. Its intimacy joined with its context of betrayal made even me, as a viewer feel vulnerable. That weakness is what makes this work so easy to relate to as well as the anger, fear, and revenge it evokes. 

Both works are complex. Chicago's work was detailed and labored with love. Its concept was grand and was successfully portrayed. Bourgeois creates a piece that depicts so many complicated emotions simultaneously that you can't help but get personal with it because that is what makes us human- that we can feel all those things and it amazed me they could all be represented.

by Yunting Nuang

In 1889, Van Gogh had lost his senses, again. After a dispute vehemently with Gauguin, he cut off one ear. Then, he was sent to the madhouse. He was stay there about one year. Meanwhile, he still painted hard, and he completed more than one hundred and fifty oil paintings and one hundred charcoal drawings in the madhouse. His paintings already tented to expressionism. In his paintings, some rising and falling patterns look like the fire and the sea waves, full of the spirit of sentimental and illusion.

“The starry night” is a masterpiece in that time. This painting shows a highly exaggerated and very impressive night sky. The curled rotating cloud, the visional stars and the incredible orange-yellow moon. I think the painter seen this vision maybe is in the illusion and dizzy. Also the picture shows two kinds of line style, first one is distorted long line, other is broken short line, two lines interaction to each other, make the tableau present the blinding and fantasy. In terms of composition, the disturbance of the sky and tranquility of the village are in sharp contrast. The flame and the transverse mountains are making a visual balance.  The reddish-brown flame look like want to escape from the painting, but the distance from the top of painting to the flame is a kind of space the flame cannot escape. 

In this painting, the rich and powerful pigments become to a scene between the sky and the earth.  The landscape seems being mad, the moon and the cloud and the stars are revolve, this reflecting the restless emotion of the painter and intoxicate of the illusion world.

A look at Jackson Pollock Through Mathematics and Science:

By Thomas Blakely 
To create his certainly unique works of art, Jackson Pollack would lie a canvas on the floor and use a stick or trowel to drip, splatter, and coil paint onto the canvas.  A new scientific take on the work of Pollock called Pollock: Physics Today analyzes research on Pollock's work and style through fluid physics.  Researchers sought to discover the method behind his works using various viscosity of paint and the unprecedented use of gravity to obtain the style, splashes, and coils seen only within his work.  Researchers discovered through the management of paint flow and height above the canvas, Pollock made various types of paint compositions and sizes.  The mathematical and physical study into this type of fluid science had not been around until after Pollock's works had been finished.  Pollock's use of fluid dynamics to create art predates the ability of physicists to mathematically model the same process.

Another use of mathematics and science to analyze the work of Jackson Pollock are the rules of fractal geometry.  Fractal geometry has been defined as "a rough or fragmented geometric shape that can be split into parts, each of which is a reduced-size copy of the whole, a property called self similarity.  Pollock's paintings were viewed and seen to contain similar aspects and dimensions like the natural colors found in trees, clouds, coastline etc.  The use of fractal geometry was also thought to aid in the determination between real and fake Pollock paintings.  However, case scientists found that this cannot be verified due to the inability to magnify Pollack paintings to an extent in which fractal geometry can be analytically applied. 

The ability of the works of Jackson Pollock to generate debate in both the art and science communities is quite interesting.  His paintings leave interpretation entirely up to the viewer which makes the scientific analysis of these works to be very one sided and directional.  Although science has sought to explain methods and structure or art, it will never be able to fully explain and understand its emotional ideas and composition.



Interesting article for the blog from the New Yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/07/12/100712fa_fact_grann