If he did it on a computer i think that is quite good
I don't like it and regardless of how difficult it is, using an iPad is just not art to me - I don't mind some modern art but I draw the line at computer generated "art" :eek:
Hmmm... Casting a critical eye over this piece, I feel that Hockney has conceptually activated the ridulous nature of monarchy in a highly accessible piece of work.
The devious simplicity of using what can only be described as a floating prison ship to represent the barbaric conditions of the slave labour bussed in to police the event. Or perhaps it's a metaphor which signifies the cage mentality of the flag-wavers, trapped by their inability to escape from a rose-tinted past?
The image of the Duke turning blue in the cold, spatially undermining the joyous celebrations by being hospitalised, lends a touch of pathos, while the painter's use of vivid grey colours and the formal juxtaposition of rain on flotilla perfectly sums up what a dismal washout the whole event was.
In summary, Hockney has captured the dying nature of a medieval relic, a moment when the monarchy did indeed become history.
Or, he forgot he was supposed to do this piece, left it until 20 mins before it was due, and came up with this effort!
Ladymoanalot: Not that I'd know anything about art, being a pleb and all that, but I've been looking at your painting for ages, it's mesmerising. A personal question and I won't be offended if you tell me to faff off but have you ever sold any of your work?
I like it. It captures movement, joy and spirit simply. People always say 'I could do that' when they see a painting, but they are not Hockney.
by that rationale, anybody could come up with an effort that looks like a six year old did it, and if Hockney put his name to it, everybody would be gushing over how fabulous it was.
Ladymoanalot: Not that I'd know anything about art, being a pleb and all that, but I've been looking at your painting for ages, it's mesmerising. A personal question and I won't be offended if you tell me to faff off but have you ever sold any of your work?
No I just do it for pleasure, its cheap entertainment.
Which is exactly my issue with modern art. It's not about the skills or the imagination used. It's about whose name is on the white label. Ingratiate yourself with the right folk from the art clique and you can get yourself some "awards" and then shift any old crap for a small fortune.
I think lovers of modern art would argue with you and can pick out why one work is superior to another. You have to recall that Monet and his group were considered crap at one time. I as one example do not prefer non-representational art on the whole but I appreciate that many do and some are skilled artists themselves.
Also being simple can be more difficult than being complex, like writing while using fewer words.
No I just do it for pleasure, its cheap entertainment.
If I saw your artwork on sale for a couple of grand, I wouldn't even question the validity of the price :eek:
Not only is it technically good, it's really interesting to look at, like Pop-noodle I looked at it for ages and all I wanted to do was pop into the painting and live in that house.
Well, I like it, It's bright, cheerful and sums up all that happened on the day as I remember it - rain, river, Tower Bridge, Queenie and Dukey, boats and flags.
It's of the 'naive' style of painting, by no means is Hockney alone - look up the work of St. Ives artist, Alfred Wallis.
Incidentally, anyone who knows London will know that the 'blue mountain' on the right hand side of the painting is City Hall in Southwark and not the Shard, which is on the same side of the river as the Tower of London!
Whenever I hear that expression (I could do that), I take it to mean that OK, almost anyone could have done a particular piece of art or whatever - but they didn't. They didn't think it up, didn't create it and only thought themselves capable after they'd seen someone else do it.
Well, I like it, It's bright, cheerful and sums up all that happened on the day as I remember it - rain, river, Tower Bridge, Queenie and Dukey, boats and flags.
It's of the 'naive' style of painting, by no means is Hockney alone - look up the work of St. Ives artist, Alfred Wallis.
Incidentally, anyone who knows London will know that the 'blue mountain' on the right hand side of the painting is City Hall in Southwark and not the Shard, which is on the same side of the river as the Tower of London!
You see when I look at the painting in your link, it leaves me cold. I don't understand it, am I missing something? I totally appreciate that people do get it, and I'm always left feeling a bit out of my depth, like I'll be shouted down for not 'getting' it.
Comments
Do something then and post it here for all to see.
Perhaps the rest of the clever dicks here could do the same?
I don't like it and regardless of how difficult it is, using an iPad is just not art to me - I don't mind some modern art but I draw the line at computer generated "art" :eek:
That is excellent, I much prefer this to the Hockney "painting" being discussed in this thread!
I really like that!
Don't like the pic in this thread though.
Or, he forgot he was supposed to do this piece, left it until 20 mins before it was due, and came up with this effort!
What does that actually mean?
In your dreams
I think estrella was being ....err....ironic?;)
by that rationale, anybody could come up with an effort that looks like a six year old did it, and if Hockney put his name to it, everybody would be gushing over how fabulous it was.
No I just do it for pleasure, its cheap entertainment.
It means unless they are art forgers they cannot do what he does, as well as he does, and with the originality of ideas. They can imitate him though.
I think lovers of modern art would argue with you and can pick out why one work is superior to another. You have to recall that Monet and his group were considered crap at one time. I as one example do not prefer non-representational art on the whole but I appreciate that many do and some are skilled artists themselves.
Also being simple can be more difficult than being complex, like writing while using fewer words.
None of them painted this.
If I saw your artwork on sale for a couple of grand, I wouldn't even question the validity of the price :eek:
Not only is it technically good, it's really interesting to look at, like Pop-noodle I looked at it for ages and all I wanted to do was pop into the painting and live in that house.
Thank God for that, one Hockney producing crud that that pathetic picture is bad enough, any more like him would be just too much
It's of the 'naive' style of painting, by no means is Hockney alone - look up the work of St. Ives artist, Alfred Wallis.
Incidentally, anyone who knows London will know that the 'blue mountain' on the right hand side of the painting is City Hall in Southwark and not the Shard, which is on the same side of the river as the Tower of London!
You see when I look at the painting in your link, it leaves me cold. I don't understand it, am I missing something? I totally appreciate that people do get it, and I'm always left feeling a bit out of my depth, like I'll be shouted down for not 'getting' it.