Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]Robert Nickelson
Mon, 5 Oct 1998 20:59:24 MST
If that were the simple truth about Picasso's artworks that we are
just over exposed to it -- then why do some styles never seem
over exposed and why do we -- consider some artworks masterworks?
Picasso's works maybe need to be looked at as we look at symbols --
what we call art seems to become meaningfully appreciated as it moves
to a symbol. Read Townsend's An Introduction to Aesthetics -- Or
George Dickie's theories on Anti-Anti-essentialism -- art is defined
by the artworld, when it is meaningfully appreciated. Some of
Picasso's works bring tears to my eyes -- a mother and child painting
at the Art Institute of Chicago -- a large work -- with a large woman
and baby -- but it is very moving -- it becomes a symbol to me. I
don't think I will ever get to the point where I am over exposed to
that deep of a feeling for as long as I live.