As a very important artist, I feel that it is my responsibility to my audience and my craft to eschew the banalities of so-called “pop art” and embrace weighty themes that will resonate and endure beyond this fleeting moment. And what more enduring theme could there be than how cute I look? I mean, come on.
I’d put that in my living room, Sharon H. And the painting too.
Pup art!
We need all the happy little pups we can get.
Have y’all been following this controversy?https://observer.com/2020/08/twitter-fight-van-gogh-cafe-terrace-at-night/ Fascinating!
It’s an interesting controversy and all I’ll say is beauty is in the eye of the beholder and art is subjective.
I’m all for realism (as in, artists should be able to prove they can make something look realistic) but I believe that true art comes from personal expression and interpretation, like story-telling or music.
Serious art is what the “art community” says it is. Time we got rid of that nonsense. Both of these paitings are beautiful and artistic to me – and silkscreens of Marilyn Monroe are NOT.
Here’s the tweet that forms the basis of the article:
I’m not buying this criticism of Van Gogh. He painted his impression of this cafe scene exactly as skillfully as he was meant to, no more or less. Van Gogh’s goal in his art was not to paint photo-realistically, but to share his impressions of the world as he experienced it.
The other painting is a technically proficient rendering, and like Van Gogh the artist adds some impressionistic touches to make the scene feel warm and inviting. That’s a creative decision, no more or less valid than the one Van Gogh made.
Nicely put, NTMTOM! Thanks for chiming in and for the original tweet!
I agree, 100%
I would choose to be in Van Gogh’s painting before I would the other one.
Totes adorbs, pupperoo. Totes adorbs.