Not a Van Gogh fan. I'm more of a Hudson Valley School type. Love Bierstadt and Cole. It's all about the big sky and clouds for me. Next up is "architectural" type paintings - buildings, street scenes, windows, doors, et al. And gardens - always gardens! And.........if you google "Victorian Ladies Writing" in images a gazillion cool paintings of ladies at their desks come up. Or Victorian ladies in gardens. Swoon! I bet you'd have never pegged me for such a traditionalist when it came to art.
Neither am I Adrienne. I did lookup the Writing and the gardens. Lots of good looking furniture in the writing one and lots of great images in the gardens one.
I'm more of a Dali fan as well as some of the masters.
Ewwwwwwww - Dali? The only Dali paintings I like are his religious ones. I have a signed print my aunt acquired at the opening of his Last Supper painting in DC. He was signing prints for some of the attendees. I spoke to the Dali museum about the print many years ago and they said they had never heard of such a thing in circulation. My guess is that most of them hit the trash can. However, once in awhile they show up at auction or even ebay and they go for $700.00 - $2000.00.
As long as the Victorian Ladies in images a gazillion cool paintings of ladies at their desks, or Victorian ladies in gardens, with one breast showing - uncovered. A real traditional painting of Victorian Era.
My comment was humorous and real. I worked service for a company, went upstairs for a look around running up the stairs at a customers house - then coming down the stairs had time to see pictures on the wall; there was one of their daughter (20 something) with one breast uncovered. It still is a thing today. Just like in the old old days.
Since I m native New Yorker, though long gone, I've seen the original Starry Night any number of times at MOMA (The Museum of Modern Art) –– a favorite place to visit with relatives as a child, and later a hangout for enjoying a sandwich lunch in the sculpture garden when the weather was fine. MOMA, itself, is a work of art –– a wonderful place that provides a pleasant respite from the madding crowds and noisy traffic on the city streets, and a good ae o collect one's thoughts.
I've often wondered how many have noticed how very small, muted and insignificant the village church and its surroundings appear next to the mysterius swirling images of imaginary heavenly bodies filling Van Gogh's vivid, slightly mad conception of the night sky?
But what IS that dark, jagged, upward thrusting vertical image that dominates the picture on the left?
The more I see it the more signofocant it seems. It doesn't strike me as a FRIENDLY image at all. There's something vaguely MENACING about it –– or so it seems to me now.
I wonder what it meant to Van Gogh? I doubt we'll ever know.
In my experience I've learned that all great things have always an element of mystery about them.
Great works of art prompt more questions than they give answers. And so it is with the Cosmos.
If we knew everything, life would cease very quickly to interest us.
The image left of center is a cypress, present in several of his landscapes of that period.
It's a dark image. He'd moved beyond the simple comfort of The Bedroom to a more agitated vision. He was a very versatile painter. Magnificent portraitist.
Oh I knew it was a TREE, Ducky, but it was the dark, spiky, oddly MENACING aspect it brought to the scene that moved me to comment on it.
by the way could YOU explain who and why ANYONE –– even a twarped, demented LEFTIST –– could discern evidence White Privilege and Misogyny in a phantasmagorical creation such as this?
Unlike our genial host, I LIKE Van Gogh's work, thugh Starry Night is one of my least favorite of his creations. Posters of his Sunflowers Series bought at MOMA adorned the walls of my dorm room in college. I much prefer the bright golden warmth and high energy of his landscapes and scenic views. His self-portrait is a masterpiece.
I doubt, however, that Van Gogh experienced much-if-any comfort –– either in or out of the bedroom –– in his generally tortured existence. I appreciae what he gave to the world, bu have always seen him as a tragic figure.
Van Gogh has always been overrated. When my daughter was in kindergarten, she would come home with finger paintings that took more talent than the stuff I see pumped out by Van Gogh.
Not a Van Gogh fan. I'm more of a Hudson Valley School type. Love Bierstadt and Cole. It's all about the big sky and clouds for me. Next up is "architectural" type paintings - buildings, street scenes, windows, doors, et al. And gardens - always gardens! And.........if you google "Victorian Ladies Writing" in images a gazillion cool paintings of ladies at their desks come up. Or Victorian ladies in gardens. Swoon! I bet you'd have never pegged me for such a traditionalist when it came to art.
ReplyDeleteNeither am I Adrienne. I did lookup the Writing and the gardens. Lots of good looking furniture in the writing one and lots of great images in the gardens one.
DeleteI'm more of a Dali fan as well as some of the masters.
Ewwwwwwww - Dali? The only Dali paintings I like are his religious ones. I have a signed print my aunt acquired at the opening of his Last Supper painting in DC. He was signing prints for some of the attendees. I spoke to the Dali museum about the print many years ago and they said they had never heard of such a thing in circulation. My guess is that most of them hit the trash can. However, once in awhile they show up at auction or even ebay and they go for $700.00 - $2000.00.
DeleteI'm jealous Adrienne. The religious paintings are my favorite too.
DeleteAs long as the Victorian Ladies in images a gazillion cool paintings of ladies at their desks,
ReplyDeleteor Victorian ladies in gardens, with one breast showing - uncovered.
A real traditional painting of Victorian Era.
My comment was humorous and real.
DeleteI worked service for a company, went upstairs for a look around running up the stairs at a customers house - then coming down the stairs had time to see pictures on the wall; there was one of their daughter (20 something) with one breast uncovered.
It still is a thing today. Just like in the old old days.
TsWs
Hey TS/WS, Yes, people were not so hung up about nudity in art in those days.
DeleteSince I m native New Yorker, though long gone, I've seen the original Starry Night any number of times at MOMA (The Museum of Modern Art) –– a favorite place to visit with relatives as a child, and later a hangout for enjoying a sandwich lunch in the sculpture garden when the weather was fine. MOMA, itself, is a work of art –– a wonderful place that provides a pleasant respite from the madding crowds and noisy traffic on the city streets, and a good ae o collect one's thoughts.
ReplyDeleteI've often wondered how many have noticed how very small, muted and insignificant the village church and its surroundings appear next to the mysterius swirling images of imaginary heavenly bodies filling Van Gogh's vivid, slightly mad conception of the night sky?
But what IS that dark, jagged, upward thrusting vertical image that dominates the picture on the left?
The more I see it the more signofocant it seems. It doesn't strike me as a FRIENDLY image at all. There's something vaguely MENACING about it –– or so it seems to me now.
I wonder what it meant to Van Gogh? I doubt we'll ever know.
In my experience I've learned that all great things have always an element of mystery about them.
Great works of art prompt more questions than they give answers. And so it is with the Cosmos.
If we knew everything, life would cease very quickly to interest us.
Franco, that dark image on the left is the hildebeast being ejected from Hell to temporarily infect the Earth.
Delete};^)>
DeleteThe image left of center is a cypress, present in several of his landscapes of that period.
DeleteIt's a dark image. He'd moved beyond the simple comfort of The Bedroom to a more agitated vision.
He was a very versatile painter. Magnificent portraitist.
I wouldn't give you ten cents for a Van Gogh unless I could sell it immediately to someone else for more.
DeleteOh I knew it was a TREE, Ducky, but it was the dark, spiky, oddly MENACING aspect it brought to the scene that moved me to comment on it.
Deleteby the way could YOU explain who and why ANYONE –– even a twarped, demented LEFTIST –– could discern evidence White Privilege and Misogyny in a phantasmagorical creation such as this?
Unlike our genial host, I LIKE Van Gogh's work, thugh Starry Night is one of my least favorite of his creations. Posters of his Sunflowers Series bought at MOMA adorned the walls of my dorm room in college. I much prefer the bright golden warmth and high energy of his landscapes and scenic views. His self-portrait is a masterpiece.
I doubt, however, that Van Gogh experienced much-if-any comfort –– either in or out of the bedroom –– in his generally tortured existence. I appreciae what he gave to the world, bu have always seen him as a tragic figure.
Checkout the dramatically foreshortened bed in The Bedroom . It dominates the room and sleep is a state he longs for.
DeleteVan Gogh has always been overrated. When my daughter was in kindergarten, she would come home with finger paintings that took more talent than the stuff I see pumped out by Van Gogh.
ReplyDeleteAgree Fredd. He paints like he is almost blind. I prefer clear interesting images. Remington's western stuff comes to mind.
DeleteDitto Picasso. I wouldn't give you a dime for one of his paintings for the purpose of hanging it in my house.
I'd hang it
DeleteSadly most seem to find his later work such as this his best work. His early work I find so different and enjoy greatly.
ReplyDeleteMaybe this one Bunk but I don't see anything I'd pay more than a penny for....
Deletehttps://www.oceansbridge.com/shop/uncategorized/view-of-a-park-in-paris