Every art scholar in the world is going to want to kill me for asking this...
2007-01-21 08:19:56 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Visual Arts ➔ Painting
originality
2007-01-21 08:22:11 · answer #1 · answered by redims81 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
He could paint in the classic style...so talent? yes, but more like a statement...
For the first time someboy was taking an object and showing it from all angels at one time. Almost like taking it through time. Stand at one side of something then walk around to the other side, then paint that all at once. That is what Picasso did!
Art is not always about creating what is recognizable. It can also be about the avant gard, expression, statement, etc. This is seen through the evolution of art...Monet, Rodin, DuChamp, Man Ray and many others. Look into Jackson Pollock. He is the easiest to relate this to with his "action" paintings.
2007-01-24 09:52:30 · answer #2 · answered by Sarah S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ian!!! LOL I always wanted to ask something like this!
Picasso may have been thought to be an artistic genius, but I for one don't find him particularly talented...in any area he worked in.
His sculpture and ceramic works are as demented looking as his paintings. Though he did have genius in taking art to new forms, the form itself is lacking in beauty, other than use of color, and makes one feel, well, skewed. Looking at Picasso's art always made me ashamed of being female, if that makes sense.
2007-01-21 08:34:15 · answer #3 · answered by aidan402 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
use of colour, shapes, but what you need to think of is the emotion, people can tell emotion with a poem, story a movie or song, using words, picasso's paintings convey emotion in a single painting, even a story take Geurnica for eg, a painting depicting the horror of the Spanish Civil War.
Sometimes good art is how it makes you feel afterwards, if you keep talking about it then it is great.
A vase of flowers could be aesthetically pleasing to the eye but who's really going to talk about it afterwards?
2007-01-21 17:33:49 · answer #4 · answered by phantasmagoriajewellery 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like his early works, Blue & Rose Periods, and Cubism, but after the 1920's he merely coasted on his fame until he painted the powerful anti-war statement, "Guernica", his final masterpiece.. His last works (50's - 70[s) were commercial crap.
Btw, re: "pablo picasso was never called an a******! check out the circle jerks song from the movie repo man"
Actually, the song was written and originally recorded by Jonathan Richman -- who does it better.
2007-01-21 10:47:15 · answer #5 · answered by mabster60 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I consider true art to be an original expressive concept. Something that is invented and not copied. To just paint something that already exists in the real world is boring to me. I like art that has original thought involved in it's conception. Picasso decided to paint things that didn't exist in the real world or alter them.
2007-01-21 08:33:12 · answer #6 · answered by spackler 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
His paintings are all around the world. Many of his earlier ones are in the Museu Picasso in Barcelona, but there are other paintings of his in other galleries, and probably some privately owned ones too. I saw one in the Australian Gallery a few weeks ago, and another one that was there of his was on loan from a French museum.
2016-05-24 07:50:21 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Intentionality.
Pablo Picasso has absolute control over what he painted. He could paint something exactly how he wanted it to be. Look up some of his earlier work and you will see the man didn't paint cubism because he could't do better, he painted this way because he WANTED to.
2007-01-21 14:52:31 · answer #8 · answered by minuteblue 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
cubism isn't THAT original.
But Picasso's paintings were radical and new for the time.
I guess the talent of every great artist is the ability to consistantly produce quality work.
He has other stuff that isn't as Out-there but it doesn't get as much attention as the really abstract stuff.
If you don't like them, you can just label them as 'Famous' like I do.
2007-01-21 08:31:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
right thing at the right time...that is everyones secret ingredient. but picasso's cubism paintings were to show the 3-deminsions in a 2-deminsion media. it was introducing a new way to look at something. if you look at it....it is showing a frontal view at the same time as a profile view.
2007-01-22 11:30:33 · answer #10 · answered by outofmymind 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
pablo picasso was never called an asshole! check out the circle jerks song from the movie repo man! thats all you need to know!
2007-01-21 08:23:27 · answer #11 · answered by john s 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋