"Every artist who came after that had to measure himself or herself towards this particular painting." what are we teaching this generation? Although an artist must look back in order to learn, they cannot hope to survive if they think they are in some shadow of "the greats." Also it should be noted that this painting was ridiculed when it came out as well.
RESPONSE TO CECBNI EVEN THOUGH PICASSO WAS CLASSICALLY TRAINED BY HIS FATHER AND OTHERS HIS TECHNICAL SKILLS DID NOT LEAN TOWARDS THE TYPE OF ACADEMIC FACSIMILE YOU IMPLY. HE WAS A MASTER DRAFTSMAN THAT COULD ABSTRACT TO HIS TEMPORMENT AND TIME
Picasso created breakthrough technique. He had the ability to paint/draw classically correct form. This is a departure in the way the artist views life and the static implementation of color on canvas.
2 replicate and 2 cr8 are 2 different things... i have no idea how to plaint... but have you any how to code? which one of us will be the genius... the one that creates the first truly original thing and defies all standards? or the one that replicates what already exists by those standards?
It is not about the difficulty of painting the image but the idea of the image, by expanding art's image and changing what is widely considered art then you open up the world to new things, this is what he has done. Oh and i am capable of drawing perfectly fine, i just choose not to so that i do not become another nameless local artist in Boresville, USA
This is an example of why so many "commoners" think art critics are full of it.
You see something that ON THE SURFACE looks silly, like anyone could have done it. Yet they say it's "great." Then when challenged as to WHY it is considered great, they struggle to tell you, and "can't quite explain it."
This guy did "ok" with an explanation, but many a flustered high school art teacher can only say, "It's great because the book and the experts say so!"
I really don't like to take art within a certain context of time, or actually the tendencies of that time, and say: but back in the day, it was mad spectacular. It's like making a CD filled with 48 minutes of pure static, and saying 50 years later: but it was something new, so it's great. Nothing is as personal as esthetic sensibility, plus it can mutate and change, like sense of taste or humour.
I agree! Or at least, that kind of explains why so much of Picasso is just plain awful.This one in particular reminds me of that feeling when two songs join together and the notes clash....discord.
i really dislike his comment at the end, by stating any one of the teens or even if he would try to create the art it would be a disaster, its as if by saying that is adding to the awe of the painting, which degrades the 'genius ' of the painting- to say that it is good because it is pushing the envelope without being awful- 'pulling it off' is an understatement to the art
I agree. Also, Mr. Pissarro's statement that the teens would inevitably bugger-up an attempt to paint like that makes it sound like none of them has the potential of being a great painter.
Spot on. My opinion is that it is possible for anybody to be as good as piccasso. I hate it how people place geniuses at a holy level. These geniouses were actually people who could not follow mainstream and started their own thing. I'm going to stick mainstream with my art, don't feel a need to be different.
This video hits off-target; possibly U-tube is not the best place for it. The speaker sounds too much like a teacher, and the talk could be edited to contain more sound-bites and less blah. These teens also seem a docile bunch, especially compared to Picasso...
I remember watching an old movie on picasso, solely of him creating paintings. It was extremely interesting to watch how he would create a painting out of nothing, you would believe it to be done, then suddenly he changes the entire thing and makes it a totally new picture... really innovative artist, that picasso guy...
it's not just picasso, i dont enjoy cubism in general.
honestly, im quite happy that it finally ended in 1911 as a major form of art. of course, some people like it, and i wont object to your personal beliefs on the art, thats why it is art. make all judgments you want, good or bad.
I'm still trying to appreciate Picasso...I love 1000's of artists works (especially realism and anything I can't do) but for the commentator...who seems smart to say that it would be folly for those students/artists to try it cause they'd fail is nonsence. Everyone can be their own great artist: A Dali, a Michaelangelo, Eicher, Matisse (who I really like) etc. Practice and experiment and imagination are what it takes.
Consider this. Even YOU could probably learn to paint well with enough practice! The ability to paint something of photographic quality is Craft; it is not Art until you can use it to elicit an emotion.
Picasso's later style strips away the Craft to focus on the Art. Because it doesn't allow you to concentrate on his technique, and (once you get past that trivial "bah, it's crap" phase) forces you to notice ONLY your emotional response to the subject matter.
@rendervixen That's YOUR opinion. For some CRAFT alone can be emotional. It's wrong to state that skillful painting is not art. Please learn to have at least some respect for other's likes. You don't seem to have much appreciation for traditional art.
picasso is aweful, at least thats my opinion, because by definition art is anything with color and shape, but throwing paint at wall, a child can do, its the finer details that really matter in art, and piccasso paints like an elementary school student would.
well that's quite something not nice to say. picasso was a virtuoso and quite well gifted in art. he didn't only draw abstract, he did more things than abstract.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of course, but you do know that Picasso was a classically trained artist and could paint your portrait to look like a photograph. His abstraction and cubism and intricate and full of depth and detail; to compare him to an elementary school student is ludicrous. I don't necessarily like all of his work, but I appreciate the symbolism and the passion of his paintings.
obviously its alright to have an opinion but mine is that it is ignorant not to respect his work, even if you do not like it, i myself dislike his work very much... but i still respect it
is this not colors and shapes? must an image be finely detailed before its image is conveyed? by your definitions, the earliest forms of art would NOT be art.
if that's what you believe about picasso, you obviously don't know his work well enough to judge it. he was classically trained in spain. you have to know the rules before you break them
As a professor myself, the title "Teens talk about Picasso" made me curious. Would they say what my students say? The students couldn't get a word in edgewise! They just sat there while an authority figure rapped. He even said "if you tried this you'd mess it up!" Not once did I hear "what do you think?" or any recognition that this generation might have its own contribution to make. Lousy teaching.
whites, you tool, had something called an industrial revolution in europe, while the colored were still throwing spears and growing yams. they all had the same start, and the whites conquered all. so yes, whites and superior, history proves it, u uneducated tool, go take a history class and learn the facts loser
Taking *a* history class provides only a limited amount of knowledge, obviously. The Igbo and Benin cultures in Africa were doing highly realistic bronze sculptures at a time when Europe was still in the Dark Ages, probably invented lost-wax casting. Major Sudanic kingdoms and empires along the southern fringes of the Sahara, had well-structured society with wide-ranging economic relationships. And so on.
It is obvious that you have no idea why Picasso wanted to paint the way he did. Cubism was a study of space in general. By they way I have not seen any other retard in his time do the same thing and not even today to so something like that. and if it where true that any retard could copy this painting I will never have the same intention that made it exist in the first place. Please be more honest to say that you don't understand his art instead of saying that it's crap.
no matter how many times I try and appreciate art (as in paintings, sculptures, etc.), it never does anything for me. Other art forms like music or dancing tend to impress me more. Especially modern art - it just looks like something a child would do. It's not that I'm insulting it, because I'm sure there is depth behind it. It's just totally and completely lost on me. *shrug*
Pissaro glosses over the emotions of the subject when he describes it. Picasso was notoriously narcisistic. Only a person that could put his needs ahead of women trapped in to a life of prostitution could look dispassionately at them as subjects and attempt to capture thier emotion. If one doesn't explain Pablo Picasso as a better artist than human being, then one isn't telling the whole truth about Picasso.
I think that all men see women as objects at some point or another. I apreciate this painting because it's honest and bold, especially, when you think about how Picasso's predecesors have painted women. Its important to have in mind that his predecessors painted women as these exquisite soft passive beings while Picasso's in this painting are the opposite..I am sure Picasso was very well aware of that.
Joachim is kinda hot.. p'etre if he was to "lighten up" a bit.. I can help ya buddy.. can we make this a bit more FUN and relevent for our teen audience.. si vous plait???
in the art world theres a bunch of prostitutes lollll
stixs887 3 months ago
"Every artist who came after that had to measure himself or herself towards this particular painting." what are we teaching this generation? Although an artist must look back in order to learn, they cannot hope to survive if they think they are in some shadow of "the greats." Also it should be noted that this painting was ridiculed when it came out as well.
ChristopherMcCandles 10 months ago
RESPONSE TO CECBNI EVEN THOUGH PICASSO WAS CLASSICALLY TRAINED BY HIS FATHER AND OTHERS HIS TECHNICAL SKILLS DID NOT LEAN TOWARDS THE TYPE OF ACADEMIC FACSIMILE YOU IMPLY. HE WAS A MASTER DRAFTSMAN THAT COULD ABSTRACT TO HIS TEMPORMENT AND TIME
derblae52 1 year ago
I would like to see the other part where the students comment on "Picasso`s" art work
goatmanartist 1 year ago
The MoMA couldn't get better video quality together?
apocalypsynch 2 years ago 3
So beautiful painting, my favourite!
joye25 2 years ago
haha beautiful? it wasnt meant to be beautiful at all.
AlligatorZebra 1 year ago
Great piece
mabood1212 3 years ago
teenagers are prodigiously inane.
poetlaureatte94 3 years ago
Picasso was spaniard not french...
vonspre 3 years ago
I love picasso's cubism pictures
eirdeGH3 3 years ago
i think that picasso wanted to say that a painting with time and movement and sound is the future in art. cubism is one way to describe it.
yiavvhs7 3 years ago
it is cubist ,
go picasso
jmm1233 3 years ago
Picasso created breakthrough technique. He had the ability to paint/draw classically correct form. This is a departure in the way the artist views life and the static implementation of color on canvas.
anothercindy 3 years ago
"This shook the foundations
Yes. Ofcource picasso didnt draw or paint properly. Just kindergarden crafts. Anyone could make that painting.
African masks are poorly made. Maybe they have some historical value, but not anykind of serious artistic value.
"It would be easy to make complete mess out of this painting
The painting is a mess? I mean seriously you dont have to make a mess out of it, because it is a mess already.
Anyone who start to complain about this. please learn to draw
baretul 3 years ago
2 replicate and 2 cr8 are 2 different things... i have no idea how to plaint... but have you any how to code? which one of us will be the genius... the one that creates the first truly original thing and defies all standards? or the one that replicates what already exists by those standards?
Wizardro 3 years ago
"Those that do not want to imitate anything, create nothing"
-Salvador Dali
chandru1103 2 years ago
Comment removed
chandru1103 3 years ago
It is not about the difficulty of painting the image but the idea of the image, by expanding art's image and changing what is widely considered art then you open up the world to new things, this is what he has done. Oh and i am capable of drawing perfectly fine, i just choose not to so that i do not become another nameless local artist in Boresville, USA
chandru1103 3 years ago
This is an example of why so many "commoners" think art critics are full of it.
You see something that ON THE SURFACE looks silly, like anyone could have done it. Yet they say it's "great." Then when challenged as to WHY it is considered great, they struggle to tell you, and "can't quite explain it."
This guy did "ok" with an explanation, but many a flustered high school art teacher can only say, "It's great because the book and the experts say so!"
DominicMetal1979 3 years ago
UN BEL VIDEO!
ANTICHITASCIPPA 4 years ago
I really don't like to take art within a certain context of time, or actually the tendencies of that time, and say: but back in the day, it was mad spectacular. It's like making a CD filled with 48 minutes of pure static, and saying 50 years later: but it was something new, so it's great. Nothing is as personal as esthetic sensibility, plus it can mutate and change, like sense of taste or humour.
Maarttttt 4 years ago 2
I agree! Or at least, that kind of explains why so much of Picasso is just plain awful.This one in particular reminds me of that feeling when two songs join together and the notes clash....discord.
coolestvox 4 years ago
art is stupid
thenewmco 4 years ago
youre the stupid 1, cause u suck at art
pindtorr 4 years ago
i really dislike his comment at the end, by stating any one of the teens or even if he would try to create the art it would be a disaster, its as if by saying that is adding to the awe of the painting, which degrades the 'genius ' of the painting- to say that it is good because it is pushing the envelope without being awful- 'pulling it off' is an understatement to the art
capriccioso35 4 years ago
I agree. Also, Mr. Pissarro's statement that the teens would inevitably bugger-up an attempt to paint like that makes it sound like none of them has the potential of being a great painter.
jmiller3415 4 years ago
I agree...uhh way to encourage art to students, MR. ARTSY guy. Perhaps the future of art lies in the senior population.
ItalianStallion2k6 3 years ago
Spot on. My opinion is that it is possible for anybody to be as good as piccasso. I hate it how people place geniuses at a holy level. These geniouses were actually people who could not follow mainstream and started their own thing. I'm going to stick mainstream with my art, don't feel a need to be different.
FuiSoyYsereUnGil 3 years ago
I found this video to be very insightful. Quite a bit of information presented well in five minutes or so.
rastudio1 4 years ago
That statement is so stupid!
jonsmind 4 years ago
Excellent commentary. I was a young know it all
punk once until I got older and saw my own heros
shot down by the next generation...then I realized
it's all about a context of the time. Some are so
big-they reach across time periods.Picasso rocks.
Paul186 4 years ago
Joachim is a great man, he appears in my film Monet's Palate.
offering57 4 years ago
This video hits off-target; possibly U-tube is not the best place for it. The speaker sounds too much like a teacher, and the talk could be edited to contain more sound-bites and less blah. These teens also seem a docile bunch, especially compared to Picasso...
rjr1967 4 years ago
blablabla
threebrothersproject 4 years ago
lol nerds
rachierach66 4 years ago
Art is so..... zzzZzZZzzZZZzzzZzz
hag1ator 4 years ago
ein interessantes video, es ist gut wenn man soviel
wie moglich information ueber einen maler/sein werk
gibt.
dearmalika 4 years ago
awesome !!
Thalysiakeuh 4 years ago
very informative and interesting.Thankyou for sharing this .
Peggie118 4 years ago
deneme deneme deneme
MrEvreka 4 years ago
nice video,
janok
henryjanok 4 years ago
I remember watching an old movie on picasso, solely of him creating paintings. It was extremely interesting to watch how he would create a painting out of nothing, you would believe it to be done, then suddenly he changes the entire thing and makes it a totally new picture... really innovative artist, that picasso guy...
vandetemp 4 years ago
One of the most disturbing paintings in the history of art but also one of the most influencial
artgeek707 4 years ago
I'm from Spain and I'm just NOT a Picasso fan, I find his works just plain and simple:ugly.
ByandFar 4 years ago
angram: vile meaningless doodles
i agree with this anagram
WeaslyIsOurKing 4 years ago
truewealth...I agree...if you want to create it...'just do it', as the saying goes...
Dartha...Children rarely 'throw' paint at a wall...(unless you give it to them when they are mad)...But, they will paint on it...
"Every child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist once he grows up." - Pablo Picasso
primalsource 4 years ago
For sure...
hrhsartist08 4 years ago
I appreciate this painting and other Picasso's. I found the information to be informative.
chattykaty 4 years ago
it's not just picasso, i dont enjoy cubism in general.
honestly, im quite happy that it finally ended in 1911 as a major form of art. of course, some people like it, and i wont object to your personal beliefs on the art, thats why it is art. make all judgments you want, good or bad.
Dartha999 4 years ago 2
I'm still trying to appreciate Picasso...I love 1000's of artists works (especially realism and anything I can't do) but for the commentator...who seems smart to say that it would be folly for those students/artists to try it cause they'd fail is nonsence. Everyone can be their own great artist: A Dali, a Michaelangelo, Eicher, Matisse (who I really like) etc. Practice and experiment and imagination are what it takes.
truewealth 4 years ago 3
very good for what it was intended.
jfbaker8 4 years ago
Consider this. Even YOU could probably learn to paint well with enough practice! The ability to paint something of photographic quality is Craft; it is not Art until you can use it to elicit an emotion.
Picasso's later style strips away the Craft to focus on the Art. Because it doesn't allow you to concentrate on his technique, and (once you get past that trivial "bah, it's crap" phase) forces you to notice ONLY your emotional response to the subject matter.
rendervixen 4 years ago
@rendervixen That's YOUR opinion. For some CRAFT alone can be emotional. It's wrong to state that skillful painting is not art. Please learn to have at least some respect for other's likes. You don't seem to have much appreciation for traditional art.
RhondaSuhrie 1 year ago
picasso is aweful, at least thats my opinion, because by definition art is anything with color and shape, but throwing paint at wall, a child can do, its the finer details that really matter in art, and piccasso paints like an elementary school student would.
Dartha999 4 years ago
well that's quite something not nice to say. picasso was a virtuoso and quite well gifted in art. he didn't only draw abstract, he did more things than abstract.
micookie156 4 years ago 3
you could not have painted it. your mind isn't expanded enough to have done it. you may be able to reproduce but not produce.
smur11 4 years ago 3
expanded?
MangaKaMokuteki1 4 years ago
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of course, but you do know that Picasso was a classically trained artist and could paint your portrait to look like a photograph. His abstraction and cubism and intricate and full of depth and detail; to compare him to an elementary school student is ludicrous. I don't necessarily like all of his work, but I appreciate the symbolism and the passion of his paintings.
cecbnl 4 years ago 9
Absolutely correct.
expressions2006 4 years ago
obviously its alright to have an opinion but mine is that it is ignorant not to respect his work, even if you do not like it, i myself dislike his work very much... but i still respect it
staffy2312 4 years ago
ignorant?
MangaKaMokuteki1 4 years ago
How can you totally dislike, but respect it at the same time, staffy2312? Care to explain that, before I dismiss it as complete bullshit?
jonsmind 4 years ago
Hi, Picasso is aweful [sic]. I'm also barely literate, full of lice, and I burn myself whenever I try to make toast.
commify 4 years ago
Picasso: Dead.
Dartha999: Alive (sort of)
Justice?
expressions2006 4 years ago
is this not colors and shapes? must an image be finely detailed before its image is conveyed? by your definitions, the earliest forms of art would NOT be art.
goatgoat 4 years ago
if that's what you believe about picasso, you obviously don't know his work well enough to judge it. he was classically trained in spain. you have to know the rules before you break them
Jellojane 4 years ago
bet: you're dark-skinned
bugpowderdust 4 years ago
As a professor myself, the title "Teens talk about Picasso" made me curious. Would they say what my students say? The students couldn't get a word in edgewise! They just sat there while an authority figure rapped. He even said "if you tried this you'd mess it up!" Not once did I hear "what do you think?" or any recognition that this generation might have its own contribution to make. Lousy teaching.
profhum 4 years ago 5
This video is an excerpt of a longer segment on the Red Studio site, which also includes discussions with other artists and curators led by teens.
MoMAvideos 4 years ago
..and we shouldnt beat our kids up and so on.
calm down dr.Phil as this is just an excerpt of a longer video.
bugpowderdust 4 years ago
art is dead. long live the queen
oppositronic 4 years ago
whites, you tool, had something called an industrial revolution in europe, while the colored were still throwing spears and growing yams. they all had the same start, and the whites conquered all. so yes, whites and superior, history proves it, u uneducated tool, go take a history class and learn the facts loser
britneyspearsx 4 years ago
Taking *a* history class provides only a limited amount of knowledge, obviously. The Igbo and Benin cultures in Africa were doing highly realistic bronze sculptures at a time when Europe was still in the Dark Ages, probably invented lost-wax casting. Major Sudanic kingdoms and empires along the southern fringes of the Sahara, had well-structured society with wide-ranging economic relationships. And so on.
BennyMike 4 years ago
Humanity's time line is hilarious.
Hackelope 4 years ago
I HATE Picasso, because he can paint very well but chose to paint garbage like cubism, especially this peice of crap that any retard could recreate.
Rin81392 4 years ago
It is obvious that you have no idea why Picasso wanted to paint the way he did. Cubism was a study of space in general. By they way I have not seen any other retard in his time do the same thing and not even today to so something like that. and if it where true that any retard could copy this painting I will never have the same intention that made it exist in the first place. Please be more honest to say that you don't understand his art instead of saying that it's crap.
nancarp 4 years ago
The world is waiting for your pedigree...
murcury 4 years ago
Yes, and by all means
breasts should be painted round
jfbaker8 4 years ago
why dont you recreate it and show us? the we will know any retard can do it
mmvc9 3 years ago
no matter how many times I try and appreciate art (as in paintings, sculptures, etc.), it never does anything for me. Other art forms like music or dancing tend to impress me more. Especially modern art - it just looks like something a child would do. It's not that I'm insulting it, because I'm sure there is depth behind it. It's just totally and completely lost on me. *shrug*
snuggl3s 4 years ago 2
It takes so much effort to make it effortless, like a child can do.
MurdokX1 4 years ago
Pissaro glosses over the emotions of the subject when he describes it. Picasso was notoriously narcisistic. Only a person that could put his needs ahead of women trapped in to a life of prostitution could look dispassionately at them as subjects and attempt to capture thier emotion. If one doesn't explain Pablo Picasso as a better artist than human being, then one isn't telling the whole truth about Picasso.
quentaur 4 years ago
I think that all men see women as objects at some point or another. I apreciate this painting because it's honest and bold, especially, when you think about how Picasso's predecesors have painted women. Its important to have in mind that his predecessors painted women as these exquisite soft passive beings while Picasso's in this painting are the opposite..I am sure Picasso was very well aware of that.
nancarp 4 years ago
It's easy to do something like this if like Matisse was born first.
forq50 4 years ago
Joachim is kinda hot.. p'etre if he was to "lighten up" a bit.. I can help ya buddy.. can we make this a bit more FUN and relevent for our teen audience.. si vous plait???
katmass 4 years ago
interesting... the primitivism aspect could've been fished more.
plutoohno 4 years ago
could be possibly one of the greatest piece of art ever
monochrome35 4 years ago