i am trying to come up with an argument for a paper for my 1960's art class.... i really can't come up with much of anything that makes a good statement.
here are the somewhat blah ideas i have come up with so far...
discussing the differences/similarities between automatist drawings of dada or surrealism versus the drawings and paintings of abstract expressionists.
-Abstract expressionist sculpture according to Greenburg’s theories.
-How the sculpture of A.E./pop art relates to that of the dada/surrealists
-Jim Dine relation to marcel Duchamp…
does anyone have any suggestions, brainstorming tips... anything to help in any way?
(i have to back everything up with specific quotes, so it has to be a rational, sound argument).
2006-10-17 16:35:26 · 4 answers · asked by christy 6 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Other - Arts & Humanities
and these ideas have gotten me no where... thanks though...
2006-10-17 18:28:22 · update #1
still... no where....
2006-10-18 18:38:46 · update #2
How about "did pop art imitate life or did life imitate pop art"?
2006-10-17 16:41:05 · answer #1 · answered by rickbrowntravels.com 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Look up Steinberg...he claims that Greenberg's theories about "flatness" is better exemplified in Jasper Johns work than in the work created by abstract expressionists like Pollock. Of coarse Greenberg disagrees but its really an interesting comparison.
2006-10-17 18:56:44 · answer #2 · answered by Joanie 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Picasso was still alive and well in the 1960's and his art is all sexual, historical and covers several wars....that's pretty cool stuff.
2006-10-17 16:42:17 · answer #3 · answered by Denise W 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is a HUGE amount of info on Andy Warhol. that is easy to research.
I'd start there.
2006-10-17 16:46:10 · answer #4 · answered by Freesumpin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋