stlukesguild
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,755
The Top 59 Living Painters Ranked According to Objective Criteria
- Thread starter stlukesguild
- Start date
brianvds
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,161
Man, if I could have had a dollar for every time some or other self-appointed expert told us what the real purpose of art is.
Most of these paintings struck me as rather dreary, if technically excellently executed. I forced myself through the whole list, out of curiosity to see who would be number one. Unsurprising for an article written by someone named Nerdrum, it turns out Odd Nerdrum is the world's greatest living painter. Me, I was scandalized by the non-inclusion of StLukesGuild.
J
JohnEmmett
The Golden Cape by Odd Nerdrum
J
JohnEmmett
favorite:
The Hunt by Odd Nerdrum
The Hunt by Odd Nerdrum
J
JohnEmmett
The morbid is important… like the holy is important.
Old Masters were focused on holiness. Far too much.
Old Masters were focused on holiness. Far too much.
stlukesguild
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,755
Most of these paintings struck me as rather dreary...
Lot's of mud. I'm always reminded of a comment made by Howard Hodgkin concerning the artistic tastes of the Anglo-Americans. He suggested that British and American art lovers/critics/collectors (and they have been the dominant voice since WWII) have always had a preference for somber, moody tonal paintings... for mud and feared bright saturated colors which they deemed too decadent and licentious. Thus the preference for Picasso over Matisse. He went on to suggest that if Rubens and Veronese hadn't been such brilliant draftsmen, they would have been dismissed as minor painters as well.
I was always of the latter decadent and licentious taste when it came to color. I had a couple of teachers who pushed me toward Rembrandt, Velazquez, and Goya... and while I greatly admire all of them (and would place Rembrandt second only to Michelangelo) my own taste always leaned toward the saturated colors of Veronese, Rubens, Vermeer (and if you haven't seen his paintings in person you'll have little idea how much his colors absolutely glow), Ingres, Degas, Bonnard, Matisse. etc...
I actually do like Nerdrum and had the chance to see a large exhibition of his paintings years ago... but I would never place him... or any artist as the "gold standard" by which all art must be measured.
Lot's of mud. I'm always reminded of a comment made by Howard Hodgkin concerning the artistic tastes of the Anglo-Americans. He suggested that British and American art lovers/critics/collectors (and they have been the dominant voice since WWII) have always had a preference for somber, moody tonal paintings... for mud and feared bright saturated colors which they deemed too decadent and licentious. Thus the preference for Picasso over Matisse. He went on to suggest that if Rubens and Veronese hadn't been such brilliant draftsmen, they would have been dismissed as minor painters as well.
I was always of the latter decadent and licentious taste when it came to color. I had a couple of teachers who pushed me toward Rembrandt, Velazquez, and Goya... and while I greatly admire all of them (and would place Rembrandt second only to Michelangelo) my own taste always leaned toward the saturated colors of Veronese, Rubens, Vermeer (and if you haven't seen his paintings in person you'll have little idea how much his colors absolutely glow), Ingres, Degas, Bonnard, Matisse. etc...
I actually do like Nerdrum and had the chance to see a large exhibition of his paintings years ago... but I would never place him... or any artist as the "gold standard" by which all art must be measured.
stlukesguild
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,755
I've always liked the quote:
All opinions on art are subjective, but some opinions are better than others.
All opinions on art are subjective, but some opinions are better than others.
J
JohnEmmett
one can blend morbid and color,
such as this …
such as this …
J
JohnEmmett
J
JohnEmmett
In times of COVID-19…
Peter Zokosky
Peter Zokosky
Last edited by a moderator:
brianvds
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,161
Me, I quite like muted tones, but there is a difference between muted tones and mud. E.g. Rembrandt's work never strikes me as muddy. They did in the past, when, lacking access to any of his originals, all I had were very poor reproductions in books. I couldn't work out why the heck he was so admired. Neither could my uncle, who was an impressionist-style artist. Then, on a visit to the Netherlands, he got to see originals, and when he came back he couldn't shut up about Rembrandt.
I finally got to see really good reproductions on the web, and suddenly I could see what everyone was raving about. I respect Nerdrum's work, but Rembrandt he ain't.
With most of the artists on this list of 59, I get a distinct impression of artists trying too hard to address weighty, universal themes, in a weighty, important sort of manner. They try to paint something that will still be striking and relevant in three centuries, and end up painting something that isn't even particularly striking or relevant NOW, let alone three centuries from now.
The great artists of the past actually mostly addressed issues that were very relevant to their own time and culture, and somehow managed to end up with work that turned out to have universal appeal.
Now everyone knows how I sometimes bemoan my own lack of talent. But I can tell you one advantage: it also sort of liberates me from having to be this really deep, important artist. I sometimes think I'm having far more fun with my art than any of the world's 59 greatest living painters.
J
JohnEmmett
Artyczar
Moderator
- Messages
- 13,277
Gee, I wonder why.I've always liked the quote:
All opinions on art are subjective, but some opinions are better than others.
J
JohnEmmett
I don't know if I agree or disagree…
Maybenartist
Well-known member
- Messages
- 553
I've binned paintings that look as dull or lifeless as this! I've never liked works that look totally staged, as this does.
J
