This will be controversial but the Christianity is a critical reason the painting I posted is so good, in my opinion.If you want renaissance with less christianity, Albrecht Durer is for you.
There is much room for subjectivity in art, but if there is anything that could be called objectively beautiful in this world, this is somewhere at the very top.
I don't understand this at all. I like Kandinsky but a lot of abstract art for me is just *whoosh*
Oh, that is good.This is more surrealism. I like how the work is on the tip of your tongue, mentally. As if you could understand it if you just knew what those objects were. They look like furniture so maybe you try to guess their function. And then you see how they are connected either by pipes or with some thread. What does that mean?
It's not stupid to a lot of people.You disagreed for an incredibly stupid reason given the age of the painting and the culture it came from
That fucking water. This is goodYeah, not a fan, sorry OP.
I like Ivan Konstantinovich Aivazovsky and his obsession with the sea.
You don't know of any one who criticizes Jesus and Mary being white washed? Ok.Well I hope they can explain why better than you. I don't see a big push to criticize italian renaissance art from 500 years ago because of their depictions of POC. But I'm not in those circles.
...I think I'm in love with whatever it is I'm seeing here...
You don't know of any one who criticizes Jesus and Mary being white washed? Ok.
Yeah, not a fan, sorry OP.
I like Ivan Konstantinovich Aivazovsky and his obsession with the sea.
Hieronymus Bosch is one of my favorite artists. While this triptych is his most famous piece, he's got a lot of wonderful works that I recommend people check out if they like this.
Really glad to see someone else at bat for Dore in here. His work is far and away my favorite out there, regardless of being paintings or woodcuts.
Love the works of Gustave Dore. As someone who is colorblind, his work really hits me.
Beautiful. I could get lost in the detail.
Her face...
One more from Gore. It's an etching but it's too good not to put here.
Why would anyone do this for a painting that's hundreds of years old? Seems completely pointless.You don't know of any one who criticizes Jesus and Mary being white washed? Ok.
Two dogs are cheating, not one. The one dog has folded (aka: accepted defeat without throwing more money in), and is passing a valuable card that was in his hand to the other dog. It's a sort of selfless kind of cheating, because the dog that seems to be cheating loses, and gains nothing. And yet, both of the dogs involved in the cheat have stacks of chips, while the other dogs are being cleaned out. It implies that there has been an alternating back-and-forth between these two cheating dogs, as one accepts a harmless defeat to allow the other to score a victory. There is a bond of trust between these two thieves, who accept defeat as the way to win.These are all ok, but man how do you beat dogs playing poker. That one dog is even cheating, that says something profound about the soul
If you're into this sort of style and the surreal desolation feeling it instills, give Wayne Barlowe's "Barlowe's Inferno" a look sometime. It's all heavily inspired by artists like Beksinski, but with a distinct twist on it. I don't think I can really use it as an example here since the images aren't technically paintings, but the quality and sheer otherworldliness of them is incredible.Beksinski, the creator of the art that gets reposted 10,000 times by nerds any time painting comes up.
I actually do like his work a ton, but boy does he get posted a lot on gaming and nerd communities.
Dürrer also did religious works but his drawings, paintings and engravings of profane subjects gives an intriguing look at the time he lived in.This will be controversial but the Christianity is a critical reason the painting I posted is so good, in my opinion.
Why do people have to be ok with something because it's hundreds of years old?Why would anyone do this for a painting that's hundreds of years old? Seems completely pointless.
I just don't see the point is critiquing something with modern sensibilities that's hundrends of years old. Rolling your eyes at a 500 year old painting of Jesus because he's depicted as whites seems like the goofiest shit ever. To what end? What is being accomplished here?Why do people have to be ok with something because it's hundreds of years old?
I actually have a bunch of Barlowe saved on my computer. I really, really love his alien biology art.If you're into this sort of style and the surreal desolation feeling it instills, give Wayne Barlowe's "Barlowe's Inferno" a look sometime. It's all heavily inspired by artists like Beksinski, but with a distinct twist on it. I don't think I can really use it as an example here since the images aren't technically paintings, but the quality and sheer otherworldliness of them is incredible.
You don't know of any one who criticizes Jesus and Mary being white washed? Ok.
Why do people have to be ok with something because it's hundreds of years old?
Yep.
Isn't it odd to call anything pointless while posting on a forum? Like, to what end do you waste time posting on a forum? It's an awful counter argument. The age means nothing to me. I can roll my eyes at anything I please.I just don't see the point is critiquing something with modern sensibilities that's hundrends of years old. Rolling your eyes at a 500 year old painting of Jesus because he's depicted as whites seems like the goofiest shit ever. To what end? What is being accomplished here?
No, I just don't see it as the greatest painting in all of human history and I dislike the white washing. It's not an anachronism because white washing still exists today. And because it happened 500-600-1000 years ago doesn't mean I ever have to be ok with it. Goodbye.
I made my opinion and had people argue with me. ok? people can have whatever opinion they want of it.Your arguing with people for little reason let people enjoy the painting
Isn't it odd to call anything pointless while posting on a forum? Like, to what end do you waste time posting on a forum? It's an awful counter argument. The age means nothing to me. I can roll my eyes at anything I please.
No, I just don't see it as the greatest painting in all of human history and I dislike the white washing. It's not an anachronism because white washing still exists today. And because it happened 500-600-1000 years ago doesn't mean I ever have to be ok with it. Goodbye.
Mmm mmm mmm mmm
Almost like it was really important to art in the Western World.
I know nothing about art.....This is on of the most epic things I have ever seen. I am stunned.
Always reminds me of this:
Also, I have a soft spot for Raphael's School of Athens for its story. Basically the entire Western Canon and simultaneously the history of Renaissance Art in one place:
The person used for Heraclitus (the guy leaning on the stone front and center) was probably Michelangelo, which is interesting considering that Michelangelo hated Raphael. Plato (middle, pointing up) is probably DaVinci, too.
It's ok. Too many naked babies for my taste though.
This is my personal favorite:
Another vote for Nighthawks