|
|
Post by oh oooh on Dec 12, 2022 11:23:13 GMT
I prefer smaller the ones, like the Guggenheim in Venice where it's more intimate and often less busy. It's easy to become overwhelmed and a bit tired frankly in the larger places. Last weekend I visited the Courtauld Gallery, Tate Britain and the National and I was knackered by the end. Not the Tate Modern? I know you're not a big fan of a lot of that stuff but there are impressive Picasso, Francis Bacon, Dali and Pollock works. The Guggenheim is great, yeah. |
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Dec 12, 2022 11:24:12 GMT
anyway, still interested in answers to this All art! Music, cinema, the LOT how you'd characterise your tastes in general... |
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Dec 12, 2022 11:26:04 GMT
I prefer smaller the ones, like the Guggenheim in Venice where it's more intimate and often less busy. It's easy to become overwhelmed and a bit tired frankly in the larger places. Last weekend I visited the Courtauld Gallery, Tate Britain and the National and I was knackered by the end. Not the Tate Modern? I know you're not a big fan of a lot of that stuff but there are impressive Picasso, Francis Bacon, Dali and Pollock works. The Guggenheim is great, yeah. I've been a few times before so didn't bother this time. There is some great stuff in there and some right guff too. From now on when I visit London I'll make the effort to visit one of these places at least. |
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Dec 12, 2022 11:29:16 GMT
Why bother going to galleries when you can see very good reproductions online? That's the obvious question, isn't it? I don't know the answer.
|
|
|
|
Post by fonz on Dec 12, 2022 11:54:41 GMT
There’s a difference between seeing a real thing and a facsimile on a tiny screen tHo
|
|
|
|
Post by fonz on Dec 12, 2022 11:56:00 GMT
Plus, let’s face it, there is a bit of ‘ticking the boxes’ with some of this.
Plus, if you’re invested in actually making the effort to see something it has to affect the experience
|
|
|
|
Post by fonz on Dec 12, 2022 11:56:55 GMT
Why see live artists. Gigs etc. when you can stream something a lot easier?
|
|
|
|
Post by fonz on Dec 12, 2022 11:58:35 GMT
You could stream a Wilburys album. Adequate compensation for not seeing them in real life…
|
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Dec 12, 2022 12:00:23 GMT
There’s a difference between seeing a real thing and a facsimile on a tiny screen tHo But these days, the facsimiles (usually HD photos) are very good. And you can get closer, and inspect, and take your time. All from the comfort of your own chair. But galleries are still popular places, so yeah, like you say, the old 'box ticking' thing has to play its part. |
|
|
|
Post by fonz on Dec 12, 2022 12:03:51 GMT
Part of it maybe wanting to see art as it was originally presented.
That’s more authentic somehow.
You may be able to zoom in on a screen, but it’s about the bigger picture, literally, usually.
Sculpture needs to be seen in real life. To see the way light plays off the curves and edges, and the way shadow is so important
And to see the scale of these hunks of marble or whatever. There’s a physicality about that that can’t be reduced to an iPad screen
|
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Dec 12, 2022 13:12:08 GMT
Why bother going to galleries when you can see very good reproductions online? That's the obvious question, isn't it? I don't know the answer. I never look at online reproductions. I wanna see these paintings in the flesh and not some coffee table book. There is a tickbox element (ooo, a Da Vinci! etc) but I'm sure many view some of these paintings and come away impressed, at the very least. If only for a few minutes and, frankly, how long does any of us spend looking at these things? The longest I've spent was probably looking at this one in Krakow, in part because I could due to the place not being busy and because there was a seat in front of it.  As I get older I do feel a desire to not just experience the great art of the past in the same way I would by playing a record or watching a movie but I feel I somehow should as well. These are artifacts of our culture, examples of human excellence, connections to our past through which we can glimpse the people we once were; the lives our ancestors lived, the culture and beauty they created, both for themselves and for future generations. I mean, artists create work with goal of it being lasting yes? It's their lasting gift to us and in that way it would be rude almost to not make the effort. To not experience these things they bequeathed to us, if only in a superficial way for a few minutes. It becomes like a tribute, an act of thanks and gratitude. |
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Dec 12, 2022 13:16:09 GMT
And let's face it, we sure as fuck ain't producing shit like this these days!
|
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Dec 12, 2022 13:34:50 GMT
OOOO DUMBING DOWN
|
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Dec 12, 2022 13:46:54 GMT
It’s twue! It’s twue!
|
|
|
|
Post by tory on Dec 12, 2022 13:55:40 GMT
Galleries can be exhausting. There's so much to see and you walk straight past some works that you could spend an hour analysing.
I'm off to Venice in a couple of months so will probably hit the Guggenheim there.
Dougie, why don't we do a couple of pictures in the National before Tannhauser?
|
|
