Chris,
For me, seeing Dian and Actaeon by Titan ,for the first time, I also  
come
away with the feeling that it's a 'clonker' regarless of who painted it.
Compositionally , it is complicated an contrived, though done by a  
master.
Every artist no matter how great has it's clonkers. to me, this is one.
Picasso also had clonkers, but how can you beat these guys for  
uniqueness ?
I happen to love this clonker.
On Apr 2, 2009, at 7:57 AM, Chris Miller wrote:

> Before launching an attack on Titian's late work -- I thought I'd  
> take another
> look on the internet -- and realized that it was only a few pieces  
> that I
> can't stand -- especially those two that were recently in the news:  
> "Diana and
> Actaeon"  along with "Diana and Callisto" -- as shown here:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7584902.stm
>
> Do I really need to explain how jumbled these are?  They should be  
> cut up to
> protect the good areas from the bad.
>
> (and I also can't stand the two statues in the background of his last,
> probably unfinished,  painting, "Pieta")
>
> Regarding the rest of  William's assertions -- I do not agree that  
> "one who is
> deeply informed about that artist and the literature examining him/ 
> her" is
> necessarily a better judge of aesthetic quality than anyone else --  
> although,
> I would also not say that "most ordinary judgment is equal to the most
> informed"
>
> We just have a different idea as to what qualifies as "most informed".
>
> I've been getting into the culture of Hindustani music a  bit,  
> lately, and in
> one memoir, the author wrote of  an old man coming up  to her and  
> her teacher
> (a famous singer) and recalling a concert he had heard 30 years  
> earlier, and
> then making a thoughtful, and very useful comment.  He clearly was
> knowledgeable about the art, but he was nothing like a professional  
> scholar.
>
> Could  a non-professional scholar make a good judgment about some  
> new findings
> in microbiology or astrophysics?  I don't know - perhaps - but it  
> seems less
> likely, because a good judgment in those fields  requires  
> familiarity with a
> large body of evidence and theory -- while the only evidence  
> required to judge
> a painting is presented by
> the painting itself, and theory should be irrelevant except as a   
> way to
> explain a judgment that's already been made.
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Internet Security Software - Click here.
> http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/ 
> BLSrjnxQZBmQ3C2rA5fXZw7G6HMxTc
> U7LLTEvafX9rHUC7N6ftnxRjm8pe4/

Reply via email to