Around the time of the Golden Age of Illustration, with illustrators such as Rackham, Sime, and Dulac making a name for themselves, a Czech artist was emerging with a style which would encompass all types of graphic art and help change the art world of Paris.
Alphonse Mucha was a leading exponent of Art Nouveau, a style which fancied itself as a reaction against some of the academic art which was popular toward the end of the nineteenth century. French for “New art,” this style got its name from a gallery in Paris which focused on modern art in the forms of decorative tapestries, modern furniture and other forms of design and art objects. Along with painters such as Gustav Klimt, Alphonse Mucha helped to popularize the decorative style. Creating art which was often consumerist and borderline kitsch, the movement meant to make decorative art from anything and everything.
Like his illustrator contemporaries, Mucha had his art beginnings as an illustrator for cheap and popular magazines. His art appealed to the public in forms such as posters and advertisements for plays and consumer products. With an emphasis on decoration, his art was known for its sweeping contours and flowing lines of clothing with flowers or stars throughout the composition, which often included attractive young girls as centerpieces. Several of his works include four panels of a central theme such as Stars (seen above) and the Four Seasons.
Mucha never saw himself as a famous artist and rejected his fame. He was more interested in his Czech homeland. Considered his most important work, toward the end of his career he worked on the Slav Epic, a series of huge paintings depicting the history of the Slavic people. When Germany invaded his country in 1939 he was arrested and interrogated, making the artist very ill from which he never fully recovered. By the time of his death Art Nouveau had been considered outdated. However Jiri Mucha, Alphonse’s son, helped to draw attention to his father as he wrote about him.
In the 1960s a Mucha revival was seen in such examples as the posters of the artist duo Hapshash and the Coloured Coat, who designed posters for bands such as Pink Floyd. The editor in chief of Marvel Comics has used a Mucha style in designing covers and posters. Graphic artists of today could learn a thing or two about the advertisements and posters of Alphonse Mucha, from a day when everything was designed by hand without the help of a computer.
This is technically the third post in a series involving the statues and sculpture of Philadelphia. It is about one of the few cemeteries which is also a National Historic Landmark, the Laurel Hill Cemetery.
The cemetery is a historic one with many prominent Philadelphians laid to rest, such as George Gordon Meade, commander of the Union forces at the pivotal Civil War battle Gettysburg. It also brags of being an extensive sculpture garden filled with angels, cherubim, guardians, and all sorts of decorative monuments. One such monument was designed by the artist Alexander Milne Calder (William Penn statue on top of Philadelphia City Hall), the father of Alexander Sterling Calder (the Swann fountain in view of City Hall), and grandfather of Alexander Calder (among other things the mobile looking at the fountain and City Hall from the art museum).
If you ever find yourself in the Philadelphia area, besides the Art Museum and the Rodin Museum, which are just a stone’s throw away from each other, you definitely should visit Laurel Hill, which is about a five minute’s drive from the museums (see the link for directions); admission is always free. There are plenty of reasons for visiting- it’s more than a nice walk in the park on a Sunday afternoon, no matter how many times you go you always find a new interesting monument, and visiting such a somber and peaceful area can be very therapeutic.
These days if I’m watching cable, I’m watching movies. Rarely do I actually watch “TV.” Aside from a couple of shows most television is crap today anyway, with brain dead “quiz” shows and reality TV. I get enough reality. I want to escape reality and go on adventures, and be entertained with comedy, action, and decent drama. When cinema gives us a good art flick, I’m hooked. So don’t be surprised if I’m a little biased in my ratings- I’ll try to be objective.
This is the second list of movies about painters, the first of which you can read here if you’d like. In that list I mentioned Basquiat (1996), Caravaggio (1986), Surviving Picasso, Love is the Devil, The Agony and the Ecstasy, and I briefly wrote of Pollock, which I had not seen at the time. This time I’ve included a link to the trailers so you can see for yourself. They’re all worth checking out.
Goya’s Ghosts ****½
I did a more in depth post about this one a few weeks ago, but it’s certainly worth mentioning again. It is rare that I give a full 5 star (outstanding) rating but this one came close (I gave 5 to There Will Be Blood and Vanilla Sky). As you can imagine I really liked this one. It’s hard to warn you not to have expectations about something while writing a review. That’s akin to telling you not to think about something specific- of course you’ll think about it. Yet one of the reasons I think the critics didn’t like this was because they were expecting something different. It is not exactly a biography on Goya, but involves him in a story about two of his sitters- one being a powerful inquisitor of the brutal Spanish Inquisition, and the other being an innocent victim of such.
The movie is full of suspense and action, as well as good acting. I consider the political messages and parallels to the modern era welcome, but I will warn that you may disagree with me. However, if you are a Goya fan you will enjoy the many paintings you will see in this with an impressive collage at the closing credits. There’s also a scene which shows the artist making a print from soup to nuts- pretty cool stuff.
I’ll Admit I mentioned this in the first 6 Films About Painters, and I am also mentioning it here in 6 More Films, which doesn’t make sense entirely- so sue me. But this time I actually watched it and I was impressed. Ed Harris (nominee, Best Actor) directs and plays New York abstract expressionist Jackson Pollock alongside Marcia Gay Harden (winner, Best Supporting Actress) who plays Pollock’s wife, artist Lee Krasner. It also stars Val Kilmer as Willem De Kooning, and Jennifer Connelly as Pollock’s love interest who survived the crash that took the life of the artist and another passenger in 1956.
This is a decent artist biography about the man, the artist, the husband. It is no surprise that Harris was nominated for his performance of an often disturbed and extremely alcoholic artist. We see his frustrations with his wife, his rough dealings with critics, and his reaction to success. You’ll see plenty of abstract paintings throughout Jackson Pollock’s history from his early days to his creative drip paintings - all of which were executed by Harris.
Ed Harris convincingly portrays Jackson Pollock, Stellan Skårsgaard acts as the deaf Spanish painter Goya, Anthony Hopkins as Pablo Picasso, but how often do we find the actual artist in a movie? This is Downtown 81 starring the New York artist Jean Michel Basquiat. Basquiat was played by Jeffrey Wright in Basquiat, which I talked bout in the first post. Basuiat (1996) was a biographical movie about the young artist’s rise to fame in in the 1980s and his friendship with pop artist Andy Warhol. Downtown 81, made in 1981, is more of a “beat movie” providing a documentary on the hip sub-cultures of the city.
Semi-biographical of the artist it portrays, the movie is a fictional account of his daily life. At one point the landlord throws him out after a fruitless attempt to offer some paintings as rent. The movie progresses to show the dealings and interactions with various unique New York characters. Saying this movie is “artsy” is an understatement. While the movie stars the real life Basquait, the audio has been unfortunately lost, and is dubbed over. Of course this adds something to the hipster indie quality.
I hope I’m not being too harsh on this movie. Let me say it is about Edie Sedgwick, one of Andy Warhol’s Factory Kids, and it does not center on Warhol. Nevertheless a movie involving Warhol is worth mentioning. Even though it is about Edie, she and the other Factory Kids, along with the crazy things they did, and the jet set popularity and fashion, and crazy lifestyle was what Andy’s life was all about at the time.
I guess I didn’t like it that much because of the portrayal of Warhol. Usually I like Guy Pearce. He was good in Time Machine, and the first movie I saw him in Ravenous (now that’s a good movie!). We all know Warhol was gay- he was what was called a “dandy,” fashionably ambiguous, yet didn’t come “out” as it is known today. I’ve read through Andy’s unabridged diaries and even there does he not talk so much of the male member as he does in Factory Girl. So it seems his portrayal was just a little over the top.
That said, I’m sure it was a decent flick on the life of Edie Sedgewick- which is what the movie is about anyhow. So I’m probably judging it wrong. Either way I still give it two and a half stars. But to be fair I think I’ll have to check it out again and reappraise it. Factory Girl trailer.
Frida
I’ll have to file this under “To be watched” but it looks good enough. It stars Selma Hyeck (whose uni-brow I believe is real-but don’t quote me on that one), and Alfred Molina as Diego Rivera, Kahlo’s husband. It was directed by Julie Taymor (Titus).
The Philadelphia Museum of Art is currently showing “Frida Kahlo,” in celebration of the Spanish artist’s birthday. It includes 40 paintings with a focus on her numerous self-portraits.
Another I haven’t seen yet, but looks like I’ll give it a try. It is about the novel of the same name about the Dutch Baroque painter Johannes Vermeer and the mysterious girl in the famous painting.
On the mystical island of the ABC series Lost, one of the characters raises the question that the survivors of the plane crash were indeed not survivors at all but have found themselves in hell. “A little hot for heaven, isn’t it?” asks one to the other after it was clear he didn’t get his meaning at first. If it were me, however, the idea of a tropical island for the rest of eternity doesn’t sound half bad.
The ability to ponder our existence is what sets us apart from our close primate relatives. Some of us may smell just as bad as chimps and are almost as hairy, but to question the meaning of life is truly a human capability. For as long as we have had this ability, we have gazed into the heavens and questioned our place in the cosmos, and wondered “Why are we here,” and “What in the hell happens to us when we die?”
Of course, regardless of our religious and spiritual beliefs, we can only make guesses in this lifetime. But leave it to our amazing imaginations and fears to conjure up all kinds of mythical fairy tales, as well as cautionary tales, of what could be waiting for us on the other side. And unless you can bring 2 million SPF sunblock, you’d better not mind roasting a bit if you haven’t lived your life minding your Christian P’s and Q’s. And roasting is only the start of it- then you have harpies, demons, and other hellions ready to have their torturous way with you. Sounds like fun.
With as entertaining an idea like this, it is no surprise that the subject of Hell has been a favorite one amongst artists throughout history, religious or secular.
Hieronymus Bosch and The Garden of Earthly Delights
One of the foremost painters of Hell who comes to mind is the Netherlandish painter Hieronymus Bosch. In his Garden of Earthly Delights, Bosch uses a triptych to portray the Creation on the left, the world partaking in Earthly sin in the center, and the ultimate demise of mankind on the right: Hell. His hell is a unique and gruesome one, filled with demons sodomizing victims with musical instruments, bird/human hybrids eating people only to defecate them into a pit, and hellions taking a break in a saloon made out of the gut of a giant tree man. This is not my type of tourist destination. Joseph Bonaparte in Goya’s Ghosts, while examining the panels, “This is not my type of garden, and certainly not my idea of ‘delights.’”
The River of Styx by Joachim Patinir
Part of the mythology of Hell is that the damned are ferried over the River Styx to Hell by a character called Charon. Charon is shown by Michelangelo in the Last Judgment as arriving at the mouth of hell and forcing his passengers off in a non-negotiable and frightening way. Here Joachim Patinir portrays Charon in a wide-angled landscape with both the land of the living and the land of the doomed visible. You can barely see an unfortunate soul cowering and looking up at his devilish escort.
Dante’s Inferno
Probably the most important and well known pieces of literature on Hell is the Divine Comedy by Italian poet Dante Alighieri. The Divine Comedy is broken down into three parts- Hell, Purgatory, and Paradise. Hell is separated into nine circles leading to the center of Earth where Satan is. Each circle is worse with sinners and their appropriate punishments. Above is Dante and His Poem, by Domenico di Michelino, which shows the poet in front of the gates to Hell.
Seen above is The Barque of Dante by Eugène Delacroix.
Above is quite possibly the darkest and most disturbing paintings by an artist who usually painted pretty girls and angels. It is Dante and Virgil in Hell, by William Adolphe Bougeureau and shows Dante with his guide, the Roman poet Virgil, as they witness some demon’s punishment of the damned.
The Last Judgment
What better place to warn the impending doom of sinners than on the back wall of the most important chapel in Rome? Some years after he painted the ceiling, Michelangelo painted the Last Judgment in the Sistene Chapel. This was the subject of heated debate amongst the cardinals who called the fresco obscene and immoral on account of the naked flesh. One of the painting’s fiercest critics begged the pope to let him tear it down, calling it worthy of bathhouses, and not the Sistene. In response Michelangelo painted the cardinal’s image as Minos, judge of the underworld. When the cardinal complained, the Pope replied that his jurisdiction did not reach Hell, therefore he could do nothing but allow the portrait to remain.
The Prince of Darkness
No article on Hell would be complete without showcasing the star of the show, the Fallen Angel, the Serpent, the Beast, Lucifer, Satan, Great Red Dragon, the Devil. He is a trickster, some say, convincing the world he does not exist. It lies, it coerces, it endlessly wars with Good, Heaven, and God. Artists have rendered the Beast in numerous ways, usually showing it with horns, scales, and red flesh. Above are the Great Red Dragon watercolor paintings by William Blake.
This is Saint Wolfgang and the Devil by Michael Pacher, showing not so much of a monstrous beast but as a slithering and frail Satan, who can be beaten by the strong will of a saint.
Here Michelangelo portrays the devil as a serpent in the garden of Eden on the ceiling of the Sistene Chapel.
Hell on Earth
No one says hell is confined to the afterlife, as Bruegel points out in Triumph of Death.
All of these show a wide variety of the Devil and the fiery afterlife which can only come from our imaginations creating myths and legends as any other tale has been developed. Of course, it being almost May, the summer heat here is humid Pennsylvania would lead to believe that the idea of hell is not that far fetched.
L. Frank Baum, author of the Wizard of Oz books once complained that his books were better than Lewis Carroll’s Alice books because the stories in the fantasy world of Oz actually meant something while the Alice books were just nonsense. It appears the joke was on him, as the books such as Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, and Through the Looking Glass literally were literary nonsense. The style Lewis Carroll used was all about playing with language and logic with a careful balance of sense and nonsensical elements. This type of literature therefore knows no limits but the imagination, which we all know has no boundaries. This gives us wonderful characters which, with the help of illustrators, come to life on the page.
Alice was first published in 1865 after inspiration from Alice Pleasance Liddell and others to write some of the stories Lewis Carroll (Charles Dodgson) had told them. In 1871 Through the Looking Glass And What Alice found there was published which also included illustrations by John Tenniel. The original early Alice’s Adventures Under Ground manuscript is published in 1886- with drawings by Lewis Carroll. The Nursery Alice is published in 1890 meant to be a shortened version for “children from nought to five,” and included colored Tenniel plates. In 1998 one of the surviving first editions was sold at auction for $1.5 million making it the most expensive children’s books ever traded. This would be topped when J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter books sold for $3.9 million nine years later.
In 2000 American McGee’s Alice is developed by Rogue Entertainment and features our character in a story based on a merging of the Alice books. The excellent artwork is supplemented by the music by Chris Vrenna, the drummer for rock band Nine Inch Nails, to give the game play an eerie atmosphere. Many movies have been made from 1903 to 2004, most notably the Disney version.
Few classics have had the illustrative scope as the Alice books through history. Since it was written in 1865 hundreds, if not thousands, of publications have been made with the illustrative talents of hundreds of artists gracing the pages. We all know the famous Sir John Tenniel version, the first to illustrate Alice, and then the legendary Arthur Rackham gave us his version in 1907 (see above). Did you know even Salvador Dali did some Alice illustrations? Many wonderful illustrations of Wonderland can be found and they all have their distinct styles and qualities.
I love Pieter Bruegel. He was one of the most original and imaginative painters of the late Netherlandish Renaissance. His paintings are so full of interesting little scenes and characters with so much detail you can stare at them for hours. Okay maybe you have better things to do but I can stare at them for hours.
He was nicknamed “Peasant Bruegel” to distinguish him from the rest of the Brueghel artist dynasty (Pieter the Younger, Jan, Jan The Younger, etc.), of which he was the patriarch. “Peasant” comes from his landscapes and town settings being filled with the daily activities of the peasantry, both at work and play. One of the largest influences on his art was the Dutch painter Hieronymus Bosch, which is most evident in Bruegel’s more gruesome allegories such as Mad Meg and the Triumph of Death. Though his scenery was usually filled with characters and stories, he was considered a master of landscapes, getting most of his inspiration from nature. Some of his notable landscapes are Hunters in the Snow, The Tower of Babel, and Landscape With The Fall of Icarus.
Some of the most interesting paintings he’s done are Children’s Games, in which at least 50 recognizable games are played in the streets of a village by children dressed in adult clothing (to show adult daily affairs are akin to the games of children), and Netherlandish Proverbs (aka The Blue Cloak, detail above), in which 100 adages and witticisms are creatively portrayed all around a village. You may remember the first post about Netherlandish Proverbs where several proverbs were listed along with their meanings. But these are just too much fun for only one post!
Some More Proverbs
To hang one’s cloak according to the wind- To adapt one’s viewpoint to the current popular opinion.
To toss feathers to the wind- To work fruitlessly.
It is ill to swim against the stream- It is difficult to oppose the general opinion. A similar to this is “Ride a horse in the direction it is going”- Abraham Lincoln.
To not care whose house is on fire as long as one can warm oneself at the blaze- To take every opportunity regardless of the consequences to others.
He who has spilled his porridge can not get all of it up again- Once something is done it cannot be undone again; though a mistake can be mostly fixed, some damage/loss will remain.
To cast roses before swine- To waste effort on the unworthy (pearls before swine).
To shave the fool without lather- To trick somebody.
To shit on the world- To despise everything.
To play on the pillory- To attract attention to one’s shameful acts.
To fall from the ox onto the ass- To fall on hard times. One I like which is somewhat similar to this is “To jump from the frying pan into the fire” - To go from one bad situation to a worser one.
To gaze at the stork- To waste time.
To keep one’s eye on the sail- To be alert.
To fall through the basket- To be rejected.
To fry the whole herring for the sake of the roe- To do much to achieve a little.
One shears sheep, the other shears pigs- One has all the advantages, the other has none.
Thought you’ve seen everything, haven’t you? Check out this video I stumbled across of elephants who were trained to paint.
When I first heard about this, I expected random Pollock-esque splatters of paint on the canvases or the animals holding a brush in their trunks and making random brush strokes. But see for yourself, these elephants are actually painting. Elephants are a very intelligent animal, capable of grief, self awareness, empathy, compassion and even altruism. They can play, use tools, have an excellent memory and can be trained to make music (elephant orchestras) so it’s no surprise they can make art, as seen above.
In 1997 elephant experts teamed up with artists to create an elephant art academy to raise money and awareness. They taught the animals to hold the brushes and create lines or dots on parts of the canvas to produce pictures, many of which were abstract, but some resemble objects such as flowers and even self portraits. Other times the elephants were allowed to paint how they chose, which resulted in truly abstract and original art which is also sold at auctions.
This reminds me of Koko, the gorilla who could speak sign language, who, along with other gorillas, can create art with finger painting. They are able to distinguish colors and surprising even attach emotional value to them, for instance making a predominantly red painting and calling it, “anger.” You also may remember Tillamook Cheddar, the dog whose painting sales were making the owner quite happy.
Some argue the authenticity of the elephants paintings which is why in the Thailand group seen in the video, paintings are made before a crowd so there can be no doubt. I’ve seen videos where a baby’s arm was shown finger painting, which was obviously the parent holding the arm off screen to paint the picture. In this video I see no such foolery, and certain “myth buster” websites have confirmed its authenticity.
After reading some of the comments to the video some people argued against the captivation and training of elephants. Unfortunately these days it seems there can be no safer place for this beautiful dying species than in the care of professionals and veterinarians in wildlife refuges and zoos across the world. The artwork created by the elephants is sold or auctioned off, sometimes bringing in up to $25,000 at auction houses such as Christies. All of the money goes to the preservation of the elephants, whose numbers are decreasing at an alarming rate.
They may not be able to make truly creative works of art but can be trained to reproduce the same paintings over and over. If you think about it, that is our own situation on a much smaller scale in terms of most of the art we create, as well any other specializations in our jobs and every day life.
Elephants can paint and make artwork time and again. You have no excuse!
Sigmund Freud once said “Sometimes a Cigar is Just a Cigar.” This was long after the father of psychoanalysis wrote his books on the interpretation of dreams and hypothesized that symbols play a large role in dreams. You may have heard his famous comparison of a dream cigar to a penis (does it work vice versa?). When he made the aforementioned comment, he was stating that sometimes you need not read too into it, be it a dream or a “Freudian slip.” But then again, sometimes you do need to look underneath the surface and question what it is you are really seeing. That phallus in the castle on the cover of “Little Mermaid” is unmistakably real and not a figment of your suppressed subconscious. So let’s just call a nut a nut.
This post is a sequel to yesterday’s post Art or Pornography? in which we looked at some examples of controversial art throughout the centuries and how societies have differed in their interpretation of them. While the sex-charged frescoes of Pompeii were commonplace and hardly considered vulgar to ancient Romans, Europe in the Victorian Age of the 19th century generally held much different views on nudity in art. Today we generally see a more relaxed view on nudity in fine art, like in Antiquity. It’s safe to say that what we call pornographic versus fine art may depend on our culture and the time we live in. While culturally we differ from the liberalness of Pompeii, at least we can get away with creating art similar to theirs. So when in Rome…
I was given a link to an interesting article (kudos goes to Karen!) about Leonardo and certain body parts appearing in his work called Divertimento da Vinci. The blog concentrates on symbolism used in Leonardo’s work and the influence of Hermeticism (a religion involving magic and ancient Egyptian rituals) in art. The particular post was called “Do You See Leonardo’s Penis?” and asks the straightforward question about a drawing called Virgin and Child With Saint Anne and John the Baptist. This reminds me of my post Disrobed: Nude Paintings, Sculpture, and Photography and my spin on hidden sex references, but more on that in a minute.
Take a closer look at the left arm of Jesus as it touches John’s chin. If you give up, click on the picture for a better view. I know what some people might say, “Get your mind out of the gutter” or “You just have a dirty mind.” And while these may be true, you can’t ignore some of the signs that point to penis here: the significant veins, the thick wrist, the lack of strong contours of individual fingers, the too strong outline of the hand/glans.
If this is truly a penis showing up in Leonardo’s picture of the Baby Christ, then the question now is, “why?” First of all Leonardo has been known to include drawings and studies of the penis in his notebooks and standalone drawings, as well as androgynous figures- the Mona Lisa’s face resembles features of his own, the figure to the picture-left side of Christ in the Last Supper, Saint John, etc. So it doesn’t come as too much of a surprise to see this. Freud wrote about Leonardo’s childhood involving the painting version of Virgin and Child, With Saint Anne saying that a vulture is apparent in the folds of the Virgin’s clothing. This comes from a possible passive homosexual fantasy of Leonardo involving an attack by a vulture’s (kite?) tail in his crib. Whether this theory is true or not I believe there is much about this Renaissance Man that we will never begin to understand; he is a very interesting artist full of mystery.
Leonardo was not the only artist of the High Renaissance to include such ambiguous clues in his art. See some of the Ignudi on the ceiling of the Sistene Chapel painted by Michelangelo Buonarotti (see above.) We know Michelangelo’s sexual preferences now and try as some historians may, they are undisputed. The only woman who he was friends with acted “butch,” and he said she was more a man than many men were. It is known that a grand nephew of his altered a collection of many sonnets that the artist wrote in prose involving a sexual interest he had with a young assistant before he died. In every instance of male reference (he, him, etc.) the words were changed to female. The Ignudi such as the one seen above were simply meant to be muscular nude athletes (”Man is the measure of all things…”), had no reference in the Bible and angered many Church leaders who claimed they were a stew of naked flesh. Michelangelo was a crafty man, and although the olives may have been biblical in nature, it certainly seems he pulled a fast one on the Pope and cardinals, and included a clear reference to the male body part, intact with foreskin and all.
Psychologists such as Freud, I’m sure, have many interpretations of Leonardo’s arm, etc. and some of them make good points. However, as I said in the Nude Art post, a more on the surface explanation might be the answer. It is a well known fact to advertisers and other visual media professions that the subconscious plays a large role in our conscious actions. Therefore little tricks can be played on the sub-mind to conjure up strong emotion designed to do one thing: buy. Could it be these artists knew of this trick to get people to buy their art? It’s absolutely possible.
While the penis tower on the Little Mermaid is probably a prank played by some overworked and underpaid graphic artists, advertisers in big media are much more deliberate in their schemes. It is not uncommon to uncover a hidden skull in an ice cube, a vagina in a flower, the words “sex,” “fuck,” “death,” and “die” on labels, soda machines, and anything else. The main purpose is to create strong emotions relating to our most strongest of concerns- sex and death. You’ll also see strange things to make the subconscious do a double take such as a third arm appearing on people and much more complex situations that our logical thinking conscious would barely believe.
The Dutch word for “sex” was found written in the background, barely visible in one of Rembrandt’s paintings. Little tricks like this may have caused subconscious feelings that will make the viewer remember the “product” and unknowingly wish to have it, or at the very least think about it more and more. Another example is Rembrandt’s “Night Watch.” It is easy to argue against instances of subliminal advertising because you will always find them in the most subtlest of ways. Take the shadow from the Captain’s hand draping across the cross of the Lieutenant. In a way it appears the boss is copping a feel on the subordinate’s genitals.
Georgia O’Keefe (see Ice cave above) was a nineteenth century American master who painted flowers and skulls, and other nature scenes mostly from around her native New Mexico. The flowers were often very vaginal in appearance, and if asked, I don’t even think she could deny it. She was known for her blending of representation and abstraction, so why not make the flowers look a vagina?
These all could possibly follow along with the advertiser’s motives as far as inducing a sale. I believe the subliminal advertising tricks went away mostly in the seventies but I wouldn’t be surprised to see some of it today. Although today modesty is a forgotten virtue and soon you’ll probably see the naked bodies anyway. So much for subliminal.
Or in the case I think of Michelangelo little things like these could be subtle jokes, or Georgia O’Keefe who painted what she wanted to paint. They don’t require answers.
We all know sex sells. And I think it would be a good time to let you know, this whole sex post has been a ploy of mine to get you to buy my Kindle book. Your subconscious can’t deny it.
You are reading a daily art blog with topics ranging from art, art history, painting, sculpture, drawing, illustration, animation, artists, galleries, museums, and plenty more. It is authored by Dan Kretschmer, who lives around Philadelphia. Dan Kretschmer is also the author of a book called "Masters of the Renaissance," which takes a look at 18 of the most important artists of the Renaissance in Europe.
The purpose of this art blog is to raise general awareness of art and to share knowledge and interests. The author's goal is to spark interest in as many people as possible, and to inspire them to pursue art to enrich their lives.
To hang one’s cloak according to the wind- To adapt one’s viewpoint to the current popular opinion.
To toss feathers to the wind- To work fruitlessly.
It is ill to swim against the stream- It is difficult to oppose the general opinion. A similar to this is “Ride a horse in the direction it is going”- Abraham Lincoln.
To not care whose house is on fire as long as one can warm oneself at the blaze- To take every opportunity regardless of the consequences to others.
He who has spilled his porridge can not get all of it up again- Once something is done it cannot be undone again; though a mistake can be mostly fixed, some damage/loss will remain.
To cast roses before swine- To waste effort on the unworthy (pearls before swine).
To shave the fool without lather- To trick somebody.
To shit on the world- To despise everything.
To play on the pillory- To attract attention to one’s shameful acts.
To fall from the ox onto the ass- To fall on hard times. One I like which is somewhat similar to this is “To jump from the frying pan into the fire” - To go from one bad situation to a worser one.
To gaze at the stork- To waste time.
To keep one’s eye on the sail- To be alert.
To fall through the basket- To be rejected.
To fry the whole herring for the sake of the roe- To do much to achieve a little.
One shears sheep, the other shears pigs- One has all the advantages, the other has none.
