It's funny to see some these people feeling threatened by a painting. It's a painting on a wall ... it can't hurt you. You don't like , don' t look at it. Find something constructive to do with your time, sad sacks.
if this is art then what isnt???? and i love james kalm taking all this grad school art so seriously ive seen most of his videos and hes a grade A pompus jackass
Cy Twombly's "art" is garbage. It only represents how much more primitive modern society has become. Other then that, it is what it is, crap. I am not impressed by this bullshit and if any of you can really think for themselves, you would probably agree.
The comments about monkeys being able to paint like Twombly are so predictable and were already made 100 years ago by museum authorities in France about Picasso. This is why the best paintings by Picasso can now be admired in the US and not in France...The same goes for Renoir's nude. Revolutionary art is never accepted by the majority, because it goes against the grain.
Art? All I see is junk! -Oh that's right, that's what art is supposed to look like these days...
If you don't care what we think (the hundreds of negative comments about these stuff), why do you try so hard to make it sound interesting? It is NOT! We see these stuff in dark alleys all over NY.
@rembrandtsca Exactly, junk. But you know why it will be considered ingenious? Because the unprincipled, undignified assholes who run the art world these days say it is. Might makes right, I guess.
@claureic Oh, i don't know, maybe Vela'zquez, Rembrandt, Sargent, Leffel- you know, stuff that actually requires major SKILL to produce, rather than just doing anything, putting a nice pretentious story to it, and people gushing over the story, rather than the art.
@pcdcstudios I guarantee you that if my 6 year-old nephew did some doodles on a canvas with crayons, and the resulting "work" were handed to (insert name of pretentious post-modern gallery owner here) without revealing the name of the "artist", this would get a lot more consideration than it should.
@quintincollins Typical liberal-elitist douche bag- when he can't refute your claims with an intelligent debate based on logic and reason, he gets personal in a desperate attempt to sound clever.
@quintincollins I think I won this argument many moons ago. Too bad it took you over 3 months to come up with the "Bob Ross" comment, which you probably overheard in a Bushwick dive bar from some trust fund, pothead, hipster scumbag.
Take a breath and get a does of reality. This does look like much of the animal and children art out there. Don't pretend it doesn't. If you like it, blotchy drippy red spots, that is your taste. But anyone or any animal can make this. If it weren't ridiculously expensive, and monstrously big, people wouldn't care.
really. read some of the 176 comments and notice how many people make your point(s). Your summation implies that the Art and the Art World is a big scam. I get it! Why don't you leave this art world and go to your 'animal galleries'. Seriously, you have no interest in the 80 yr old career of Cy Twombly and no one can make you. But, your naive dismissals are uneducated and disinterested. say what you may, but go away.
Quite obviously you're confusing education with pretension.
Personally I prefer the art of people like Dali and Escher. Of course taste in artwork is a subjective thing and I try to be open minded... ...but come on.
It's a strain for me to understand how people could find these Twombly paintings even *interesting*; and the fact that some find them *brilliant* is just flat out hilarious.
the 'chimpanzee ' metaphor is quite pretentious. You are confusing your subjective taste with others. Some people find meaning in Twombly, you don't. Comparing Twombly to a chimpanzee is not open minded. There are many Twombly scholars. Do you know, or like, any living artists? It is not pretentious for others to like things YOU don't .
Hey here's an idea, you could go gather up some of that chimpanzee art. Next have some kids create their own interpretations of these Chombly paintings.
Finally you could put them all together and open another show called *Chimp, Child or Cy* where people would try to guess who did each piece of... ...art.
Could I lazily slop some paint on a canvas and call it a painting?
Yes.
Could I predict that I could just slop some paint on a canvas and a bunch of brain dead twits would fawn all over me and pay me outrageous sums of money?
@nexicidious ...so stupid ... this comment. Art has nothing to do with money and nothing to do with agreeableness. It's the hardest and bravest work of mankind because of people like you! And do you know what people like you said about Picasso fifty, sixty, seventy years ago ?
nexicidious.....i don't like Tennis, but i wouldn't waste my time on a Tennis blog telling Tennis fans that Tennis was 'hilarious' and 'ridiculous'. I just don't care.
You could, but it would be lazy and sloppy painting, not Twombly. Twombly spends entire nights on one work. Once, I saw him in a gallery: he was frantically rubbing off one of his paintings with the lapel of his jacket; to him, sth was wrong with the painting, even if it was already exhibited. Never satisfied with his own work; far from "laziness"...
@MrWowforever uh.....actually it IS a big scam, and no matter how you spin this 'art' you cannot brainwash anyone with half a brain about how great the emperor's new clothes are.
@ejdf870 what do you do for a living? I don't care, but, your a complainer. Your opinion is a big scam and is as irrelevant as your vote. Democracy and Art don't mix well.......if you don't like Twombly, then, why are you here?
@artworldpirate ...and some elitist asshole who happens to have power in today's art world tells people they should care. Mind you, this doesn't change the FACT that this "work" is a step away from literal JUNK, but, then art has become so subjective that I can actually take a crap on the floor of Gagosian gallery, and if someone important declares it to be art, tons of pretentious idiots will pay millions for it. What a sham.
Financial success as an artist does not necessarily mean that you are a bad artist. The people who deal with Twombly's paintings (galleries, curators, collectors) may be "self-centered, conceited and egotistical" (so what?), it doesn't stop him from being a great painter, with ups and downs like any artist.
I can't stand these pretentious ASSHOLES. I used to work in 980 Madison ave in Manhattan, home of Gagosian's uptown gallery, and they were the worst 4 years of my life. Dealing with these smug, standoffish, self-centered, egotistical, conceited, despicable motherfuckers really turned me into a bitter son-of-a-bitch. On the upside, I can now readily identify these types and curse them out from head to toe if the occasion calls for it.
Are you trying to sound cute? Gagosian gallery was only ONE TENANT among many in the building where I worked. I did not actually work INSIDE Gagosian gallery, only in the building in which it was a tenant.
why are you telling everyone about your job?On an Art channel? Who cares what kind of an asshole YOU are? Your office politics are irrelevant. Go curse them out! Idiot.
Did you even read my statement? I was commenting on something very relevant to the video shown. There are comments made here that are WAY more irrelevant than mine. But I guess I can't be too hated, since I got three thumbs up.
you are saying nothing about CyTwombly. nothing about art. nothing about painting. Only your JOB, next door. The majority never rules in art. hooray!!
hey..he is not living in monseratto...me and my dad (alessandro twombly) and me (caio twombly) and my sister (maia twombly) and my mom (soledad olivera twombly) are moving there...i went there about three days ago to see all the furniture...My grandfather (cy twombly) lives in Gaeta which is in Rome...he does not live in Monseratto, my dad used to live there with my grandmother (Luisa Franchetti, which prefers being called Tatia) and my grandfather *cy twombly)
guy's hes my grandfather... he know lives in Gaeta and he has a amazing house..I don't visit him often and Cy actually he is 81. My dad Alessandro Twombly is 49 and my Soledad Twombly is 41. My dad is a artist and my mom is a fashion designer
The problem here is that this type of colorful paintings do not represent a change; Twombly has been lingering on them for three or four years (with some variations). At first, 3 years ago, they were a little risky (at least to the Twombly aficionado that I am), I agree, but now they really appear decorative, comfortable and not risky at all. Not at all like the risk Guston took in 1970. But nobody's perfect, even Twombly. And thank you James, for this video...
Guston in 1970, 38 years ago, when they were relatively young men. Artists are not fashion designers coming out with a new line every season, contrary to popular perceptions and dubious practices.
I didn't talk about change or risk, James did. I am just saying that Twombly has fallen into comfortable and decorative art. I, myself, am not expecting that artist behave like fashion designers as you seem to imply. I expect to be bumped off my armchair, and that is what Twombly did to everybody in 1958 and what Guston did in 1970.
you said the paintings don't represent a change (see your above comment), then said you didn't talk about change (in the above response). then you talk of the Twombly of 1958...50 years ago! Mr. kalm said, people don't like change, which is true, obviously. I just think it is a lot to expect of an artist to repeat an 'arrival' on the scene (Twombly) or a radical shift in iconography (Guston) every few years....that's my point here:)
I was just replying to a remark by James who used the word change...Now, considering the status Twombly has attained over the years, I do not think it is a lot to expect of him to avoid the decorative. I hope you got my point...
I think Twombly has been forgetting the LINE lately. If you look at his early paintings, up to 1964, you see his mastery of line. His current paintings I find kind of decorative; too colorful. Not the Twombly I like, who blows you away by his virtuoso treatment of the line. The works in this video are too contrived; they lack spontaneity, they are too predictable. They just don't surprise you, don't bump you off your comfortable armchair...
Its an art world axiom that your latest show is always your worst show. No matter what they say, people dont like change. For someone with the signature style of a Twombly any variation is seen as a decline, yet that is where the true risk is, even if it gets decorative. JK
thanks jameskalm for this video,covert filming in a gallery...awesome! i've just been to see his cycles and seasons exhibition at the tate modern uk and it was electric! the thing that really stikes me about this video is the noise... its like a bar on a friday night... walking through cycles and seasons was like viewing his work in a temple ...total silence!
Great job. I lived in NYC for 7 years, and could never afford a book on Twombly, they were ridicully expensive. Sometimes it feels like art is for rich people, you either live in NY or buy a 60 bucks catalog. Tough choice! No wonder "commoners" often feel alienated from the art world, it is clearly elitist. Until a cheap, taschen type edition on Twombly, this helps to get a more or less clear picture about a great artist recent work. Thanks!
People who have difficulty with abstract art, I put this idea to you...
Many people expect art to represent something, to look like some 'thing'.
We don't make these demands of musical art forms - we don't expect a song (lyrics aside) to sound like a thing. For example, we don't expect a guitar solo to sound like anything other than a guitar solo in it's own right. It doesn't have to sound like a bird singing or represent any other 'thing'... (see next post)...
abstract art is art without the definite realist narrative (as in the classical artists or more simply photography. and on that note, photography has certainly replaced realist painting). it is no less valid in the same way that chopin is no less valid than puccini.
not everybody is qualified to discuss art (as demonstrated here). if you have no real knowledge of opera, old english, italian cheeses or theoretical physics, would you argue with somebody whos devoted their life to the subject?
i dare any of you dismissing twombly's work to stand 6 inches from any of the quattro stagioni, or perhaps 'achilles mourning the death of patroclus', and not be completely enraptured by it. viewing his paintings in any other way is invalid.
also anybody displeased with abstract art as a whole should read gombrich's 'image and the eye', and take note of his interpretation of zenos paradox of the arrow.
i admire your defense of mr. twombly, you are in the minority here, but i think there are many artists working today who would disagree with your position on photography replacing 'realist' painting.The work of chuck close, richard estes, marilyn minter and gerhard richter (just to skim the surface)are powerful examples of the rich dialogue between camera and artist. these things co-exist in very interesting ways.just my opinion:)
I certainly agree with you, but you'll probably find that anybody using this style successfully has used the process or style as the subject to an extent, rather than just a form of illustration (which so many people expect from art).
and as an aside, I thought Hirst's photorealist efforts were awful. that's probably how not to do it.
mr. hirst and mr. koons have lately produced a stlye of photorealism, more photo-shop, that i find very unrewarding in person. but i would never dismiss these camera tools from being used;its HOW something is used that counts for me, chuck close uses the camera very intelligently in his paintings. his dialogue with different coloured dots mimics the printing process itself, he makes the darkroom come alive with abstraction while maintaining the image(photo).:)
The question "What is art?" is a question without answer. The best we can do is define our criteria as to what is or isn't art. For me, I would say a candidate piece needs to visually engaging and/or thought provoking WITHOUT needing a lengthy verbose explanation to back it up, and it be obvious that it took a certain degree of skill to create. Twombly and his ilk satisfy none of those criteria. The Emperor is naked people. This stuff is (criminally over-priced) rubbish.
Duchamps Urinal, made in 1917!, is a counter argument to your pedestrian criteria. almost 100 years ago!!!!!!!! you will probably dismiss his work, thats fine, but people have moved on......
I don't dismiss ALL of Duchamp's work, but all he did with that urinal was put it on a plinth, name it "Fountain" and call it art. You are right in saying that people have moved on since then, but mostly in utterly ridiculous directions.
shouldn't the utterly ridiculous be allowed as an impulse to produce, along with the formalist canon. Duchamp was giving us permission, i think, to think outside the box. i'm not looking for a world full of urinals as sculpture, but following a ridiculous impulse can lead to some good stuff.......bruce nauman, robert raucshenberg, rodney graham and rachel harrison just to name a few.
Not to place too fine a point on it but, I believe that Duchamp's contribution had as much to do with the "economics of creativity" as with aesthetics. By promoting the "ready made" he was simply shifting the practice of art making from a manufacturing based practice to a service based one. Your statement that he was "giving us permission" (a fine service to offer) undoubtedly reinforces my point. JK
I not suggesting that all art be realist, far from it. I'm just disappointed that art is no longer judged on it's merit as a stand alone piece on a wall or plinth but instead people delve into this glib metaphysical rambling that the actual appearance of the art work means little or nothing. I would suggest to you that most of the abstract/surrealist "artists" might be better off as philosophers and just use their artwork as illustrations in their books.
with all due respect, duchamps urinal is a realist piece, only in a new way. to dismiss years of work as 'metaphysical rambling' seems a little sweeping. you seem to be making a conservative argument for a prior age of plinths and paintings(non-abstract). remember that the absurdity of Dada and duchamp was a reaction to the horrors of the world wars. They weren't just being provocative, they were disgusted with the futility of old forms (history). i like colorful paintings, it's my thing
If you placed the painting at 5:55 in Time Square and left it there for a week. Imagine then there was some voting device under it where people could give it a mark out of 100. 100 being the best painting the ever saw, and 0 utter rubbish, how do you think it would score? I think a single digit score at best. There could be two reasons for such a low score: 1) It's rubbish. 2) The vast majority of people who voted don't have the intellect to understand it. Which do you think is more likely?
art is not american idol. it's not a popularity contest. those same 100 random people would probably dismiss any Art. democracy and art don't work. democracy works best with entertainment, it appeals to base instincts. art aspires to elevate us (aesthetically, intellectually). it's not that people aren't intelligent enough to 'get it', art requires a little work (study ) to build meaning. most folks are just lazy (sorry) and think art is like entertainment, which they 'get'. art is work.
Lets apply that logic to music. Imagine you went to a piano concerto. The pianist takes the stage and proceeds to hammer on the keyboard completely randomly with no rhythm or structure whatsoever on an out of tune piano. After 45 minutes he stops and then explains to the audience what he meant, why the piece sounded like it did. Even if his explanation was the most profound insightful intelligent thing ever said by anyone ever, would it make the concerto sound any less cacophonous. I think not.
do you know who John Cage is? you keep proposing hypothetical situations were you invent critiques around your 'event'. this is a common device, read some of the comments on this show. as far as your musical example, there are many musicians who work against traditional melody and structure. to your example, mr. cage would laugh. i know less about music history than art history, but you seem traditional in your opinions. cacophonous sounds can be thrilling. Cage opened doors, like duchamp.
i agree. but if you think John Cage lowered the standards, 50 years ago!, my point of knowing your history has been illustrated nicely. thanks for the talk:)
What would happen if an unknown artist brought these same pieces to a prestigeous gallery?
Would they be accepted? Can we simply judge an image on its own merits? Cy Twombly is a very good artist. Would he have arrived by showing these first?
if an unknown artist brought these paintings to a gallery they would say they look to much like cy twombly's work. can we judge an image on it's own merits, what other way is there? you seem to be implying that mr. twombly is just churning them out, you are not alone here (read some of the comments here). i understand your hypotheticals but they are just wish-thinking. mr. twombly has a long career and each piece is a part of that 'actual' story, these paintings are a valuable part of that.
he can basically do anything because he has established his 'name' as an artist. The art work is secondary and has nothing to do with talent or influence or inspiration. Behold the powerful forces of marketing. The name as product. It can be purchased, collected, and auctioned. The name perpetuates the work. Most unfortunately.
to say that this work 'has nothing to do with talent' is most unfortunate. marketing is everywhere, in your kitchen, in your pocket and in your head....behold. cy twombly is leaving us soon and you are still blind.
You are right product is everywhere. Tell me where the talent is in the actual painting? At this point in the artist's 'career' his assistants do most if not all the work. The talent is the powerful connections to aggressive art dealers who have a huge stake in making and guarding the name. Talent is in maintaining a value at auction and most especially in convincing the public to buy it. Learn to see with your own eyes.
this work is a testament to the aging process, through the brush of an influential artist who has lived a long life. these paintings remind me of dekoonings late dementia paintings. we all die and these artists were and are fortunate(to have lived so long)and brave(aging is hard) enough to paint there ways toward that distant shore we all must face. humble your own eyes to see outside the eternal newness of the very market you cite.
The eternal newness of the market? A complete unknown who scribbles crayon onto a canvas would not fetch millions but most certainly Mr.Twombly would. Because his work of scribbling with crayon is original? No. Because he has a history of aggressive art dealers pushing to safeguard their own and their client's investments. There is a whole history of backstabbing you know nothing about in the auction world. DeKooning would know plenty about that especially in relationship to Pollack's work.
twomblys work sells because he has a history of making important art. you are very cynical, talking about corrupt dealers and market strategies, so american. these things exist, not just in art, were ever things are marketed. i like how mad twomblys art makes you.....its clever that way.
Twombly's art does not illicit a negative reaction from me. What does is the many who stand in awe before it and announce that it 'moves through the language of abstraction' and write volumes of nonsense about it while he laughs away.If you were to walk into a gallery with your own scribbles you would be dismissed as derivative.
It is not my definition of talent. The upper realms of the 'art' world thrives on everything but talent. It is aggressive and money based and can make or break you no matter who you are and how far you've come...but hey...keep the dream alive.
you said talent is the connection to art dealers, you said it. how would you know how the upper realms of the art world function? you are speculating about something based on your own fears; i don't assume to understand this, you do. you don't like twomblys work. great.
Talent should have had single quotes around it like this: 'talent' when I stated that it had more to do with marketing. The reality is akin to buying a plain white t-shirt. You can pay $8 for one or pay $1300 for one with the name Prada on it. Get it? No different in the art world. Has nothing to do with cynicism or fear or speculation. I actually don't mind Twombly but don't connect him with genius or influence. He's an expensive plain t-shirt.
It's funny to see some these people feeling threatened by a painting. It's a painting on a wall ... it can't hurt you. You don't like , don' t look at it. Find something constructive to do with your time, sad sacks.
quintincollins 3 months ago
11 people work at the Gagosian.
misternylon 3 months ago
There should be a stand-alone museum dedicated to his work.
KeithHarperSF 4 months ago
onore al grande maestro.
llazzanoart 6 months ago
LARRY GAGOSIAN
LARRY GAGOSIAN
LARRY GAGOSIAN
LARRY GAGOSIAN
LARRY GAGOSIAN
LARRY GAGOSIAN
LARRY GAGOSIAN
LARRY GAGOSIAN
anbernika 9 months ago
@cosg9531....quality is rare in comments. How can you look down from your couch?
MrWowforever 11 months ago
Quality is rare, and even moreso in the art world. There is no evidence of quality here.
cosg9531 11 months ago
@ejdf870. Really, the 6 yr old analogy. You are useless, go watch TMZ
MrWowforever 11 months ago
@robertrobin10. Go watch the Oscars and the NFL, who cares what u think , you non-contributing Ass
MrWowforever 11 months ago
if this is art then what isnt???? and i love james kalm taking all this grad school art so seriously ive seen most of his videos and hes a grade A pompus jackass
robertrobin10 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Honest sexy Asian brides "busizz4me.info"
AbigayleAbril 1 year ago
wonderment
johnjacopelleartistgallerycom
jaco2627 1 year ago
This is great. I love the espionage angles. Have loved Twombly's work since I first experienced a white painting of his at 10y.o. @ MOMA in 1960's.
Anyone know what the "panels" are made of? Thanks.
yangyin09u 1 year ago
Skill is for the craftsman. Labor is for the artist. Twombly labors.
claureic 1 year ago
beautiful
paperfeathers 1 year ago
Cy Twombly's "art" is garbage. It only represents how much more primitive modern society has become. Other then that, it is what it is, crap. I am not impressed by this bullshit and if any of you can really think for themselves, you would probably agree.
PermaWrath 1 year ago
@PermaWrath Speak for yourself. Not everyone is just like you. Your assumption that we should agree with you is 'primitive'.
MrWowforever 1 year ago
Comment removed
101Qoo 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PermaWrath If you could create those paintings which you called "garbage", you were to be a famous artist.
101Qoo 1 year ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
*Bad taste creates many more millionaires than good taste.* ~ Charles Bukowski
nexicidious 1 year ago
"everyones stupid except me" ~Homer Simpson
MrWowforever 1 year ago
*A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything.* ~Nietzsche
nexicidious 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
WOW, oh man, you guys are too much. Keep 'em comin'.
Please, please enlighten me. Open my eyes to the glory of Twombly's new clothes.
nexicidious 1 year ago
yawn............
MrWowforever 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@MrWowforever
Exactly! Now you're getting it. This drivel of Twombly's is a massive bore.
nexicidious 1 year ago
..............and..........yaw
MrWowforever 1 year ago
I'm no missionary and I don't care if your eyes stay closed. You like Picasso because others liked him before you...
claureic 1 year ago
"They think it's easy. They don't know it's like jumping off a 12-story building every day" (Franz Kline)...
claureic 1 year ago
MrWowforever and claureic: I agree. There is nothing more to say.
eisee8sch 1 year ago
Comparing Twombly to Picasso is a massive insult to Picasso.
Twombly is no artist... ...unless you count scam artists.
nexicidious 1 year ago
@nexicidious Please, would you declare the difference between Twombly and Picasso?
eisee8sch 1 year ago
The comments about monkeys being able to paint like Twombly are so predictable and were already made 100 years ago by museum authorities in France about Picasso. This is why the best paintings by Picasso can now be admired in the US and not in France...The same goes for Renoir's nude. Revolutionary art is never accepted by the majority, because it goes against the grain.
claureic 1 year ago
dear claureic........ :)
MrWowforever 1 year ago
Always good to see a nice stimulating debate on the tube! Unlike most commentators who are akin to mindless drones
robert000ooo 1 year ago
Art? All I see is junk! -Oh that's right, that's what art is supposed to look like these days...
If you don't care what we think (the hundreds of negative comments about these stuff), why do you try so hard to make it sound interesting? It is NOT! We see these stuff in dark alleys all over NY.
rembrandtsca 2 years ago
why bother? Move on. Go elsewhere.Quit complaining about the OLDEST artist on James Kalms site. Boring. WE GET YOU.
MrWowforever 2 years ago
@rembrandtsca Exactly, junk. But you know why it will be considered ingenious? Because the unprincipled, undignified assholes who run the art world these days say it is. Might makes right, I guess.
ejdf870 1 year ago
@ejdf870 In your opinion what type of art is not junk?
claureic 1 year ago
@claureic Oh, i don't know, maybe Vela'zquez, Rembrandt, Sargent, Leffel- you know, stuff that actually requires major SKILL to produce, rather than just doing anything, putting a nice pretentious story to it, and people gushing over the story, rather than the art.
ejdf870 1 year ago
@ejdf870 Oh, OK, I see...Nothing between Sargent and the great Leffel, then...Just junk...
claureic 1 year ago
@claureic Exactly my point. You're beginning to learn.
ejdf870 1 year ago
@ejdf870 Then I'd rather remain a beginner in the type of lesson you pretend to teach and not attend the rest of your classes...
claureic 1 year ago
@claureic Ha ha, so typical.
ejdf870 1 year ago
@ejdf870 genius is better than skill
pcdcstudios 1 year ago
@pcdcstudios I guarantee you that if my 6 year-old nephew did some doodles on a canvas with crayons, and the resulting "work" were handed to (insert name of pretentious post-modern gallery owner here) without revealing the name of the "artist", this would get a lot more consideration than it should.
ejdf870 1 year ago
@ejdf870 well, if YOU guarantee it, then it must be so. BTW my 6 year-old nephew writes much wittier Youtube comments than you.
quintincollins 6 months ago
@quintincollins Typical liberal-elitist douche bag- when he can't refute your claims with an intelligent debate based on logic and reason, he gets personal in a desperate attempt to sound clever.
ejdf870 6 months ago
Comment removed
quintincollins 3 months ago
@ejdf870 hey teebagger, did you get lost on your way to a Bob Ross video?
quintincollins 3 months ago
@quintincollins I think I won this argument many moons ago. Too bad it took you over 3 months to come up with the "Bob Ross" comment, which you probably overheard in a Bushwick dive bar from some trust fund, pothead, hipster scumbag.
Try again, asshole, I'm not impressed.
ejdf870 3 months ago
@ejdf870 wow, looking at the "happy tree" paintings hasn't helped you deal with your impotent rage issues. Cheer up.
quintincollins 3 months ago
@quintincollins Not good enough, try again.
ejdf870 3 months ago
@pcdcstudios How do you propose that one exhibits the first without possessing the second?
cosg9531 11 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Is Cy Twombly the name of a chimpanzee. I remember seeing a documentary where they were teaching chimps to do art like this.
nexicidious 2 years ago
go back to the chimpanzee documentaries, seem more like your speed. tool.
MrWowforever 2 years ago
Take a breath and get a does of reality. This does look like much of the animal and children art out there. Don't pretend it doesn't. If you like it, blotchy drippy red spots, that is your taste. But anyone or any animal can make this. If it weren't ridiculously expensive, and monstrously big, people wouldn't care.
artworldpirate 2 years ago
really. read some of the 176 comments and notice how many people make your point(s). Your summation implies that the Art and the Art World is a big scam. I get it! Why don't you leave this art world and go to your 'animal galleries'. Seriously, you have no interest in the 80 yr old career of Cy Twombly and no one can make you. But, your naive dismissals are uneducated and disinterested. say what you may, but go away.
MrWowforever 2 years ago
Quite obviously you're confusing education with pretension.
Personally I prefer the art of people like Dali and Escher. Of course taste in artwork is a subjective thing and I try to be open minded... ...but come on.
It's a strain for me to understand how people could find these Twombly paintings even *interesting*; and the fact that some find them *brilliant* is just flat out hilarious.
nexicidious 2 years ago
the 'chimpanzee ' metaphor is quite pretentious. You are confusing your subjective taste with others. Some people find meaning in Twombly, you don't. Comparing Twombly to a chimpanzee is not open minded. There are many Twombly scholars. Do you know, or like, any living artists? It is not pretentious for others to like things YOU don't .
MrWowforever 2 years ago
Hey here's an idea, you could go gather up some of that chimpanzee art. Next have some kids create their own interpretations of these Chombly paintings.
Finally you could put them all together and open another show called *Chimp, Child or Cy* where people would try to guess who did each piece of... ...art.
nexicidious 1 year ago
Could YOU make these paintings BEFORE you saw them?
MrWowforever 1 year ago 4
Could I lazily slop some paint on a canvas and call it a painting?
Yes.
Could I predict that I could just slop some paint on a canvas and a bunch of brain dead twits would fawn all over me and pay me outrageous sums of money?
No.
nexicidious 1 year ago
@nexicidious ...so stupid ... this comment. Art has nothing to do with money and nothing to do with agreeableness. It's the hardest and bravest work of mankind because of people like you! And do you know what people like you said about Picasso fifty, sixty, seventy years ago ?
eisee8sch 1 year ago
everyones stupid except me~ Homer Simpson
MrWowforever 1 year ago
nexicidious.....i don't like Tennis, but i wouldn't waste my time on a Tennis blog telling Tennis fans that Tennis was 'hilarious' and 'ridiculous'. I just don't care.
MrWowforever 1 year ago 3
You could, but it would be lazy and sloppy painting, not Twombly. Twombly spends entire nights on one work. Once, I saw him in a gallery: he was frantically rubbing off one of his paintings with the lapel of his jacket; to him, sth was wrong with the painting, even if it was already exhibited. Never satisfied with his own work; far from "laziness"...
claureic 1 year ago
you need to take your ass to an art history class cuz you dont know shhhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeeetttt.
pues13 1 year ago
@MrWowforever uh.....actually it IS a big scam, and no matter how you spin this 'art' you cannot brainwash anyone with half a brain about how great the emperor's new clothes are.
ejdf870 1 year ago
@ejdf870 what do you do for a living? I don't care, but, your a complainer. Your opinion is a big scam and is as irrelevant as your vote. Democracy and Art don't mix well.......if you don't like Twombly, then, why are you here?
kellylynn2008 1 year ago
@ejdf870 kellylnn2008 is correct. why are you on Twomblys site. move on complainer.
MrWowforever 1 year ago
@artworldpirate ...and some elitist asshole who happens to have power in today's art world tells people they should care. Mind you, this doesn't change the FACT that this "work" is a step away from literal JUNK, but, then art has become so subjective that I can actually take a crap on the floor of Gagosian gallery, and if someone important declares it to be art, tons of pretentious idiots will pay millions for it. What a sham.
ejdf870 1 year ago
Art may look easy but try dedicating your life to it.
No matter if you like Twombly's art or not a lifetime of work should be respected.
tkduane18 2 years ago
Financial success as an artist does not necessarily mean that you are a bad artist. The people who deal with Twombly's paintings (galleries, curators, collectors) may be "self-centered, conceited and egotistical" (so what?), it doesn't stop him from being a great painter, with ups and downs like any artist.
claureic 2 years ago 4
I can't stand these pretentious ASSHOLES. I used to work in 980 Madison ave in Manhattan, home of Gagosian's uptown gallery, and they were the worst 4 years of my life. Dealing with these smug, standoffish, self-centered, egotistical, conceited, despicable motherfuckers really turned me into a bitter son-of-a-bitch. On the upside, I can now readily identify these types and curse them out from head to toe if the occasion calls for it.
ejdf870 2 years ago
.......then don't work in a gallery.
MrWowforever 2 years ago
Are you trying to sound cute? Gagosian gallery was only ONE TENANT among many in the building where I worked. I did not actually work INSIDE Gagosian gallery, only in the building in which it was a tenant.
ejdf870 2 years ago
why are you telling everyone about your job?On an Art channel? Who cares what kind of an asshole YOU are? Your office politics are irrelevant. Go curse them out! Idiot.
MrWowforever 2 years ago
Did you even read my statement? I was commenting on something very relevant to the video shown. There are comments made here that are WAY more irrelevant than mine. But I guess I can't be too hated, since I got three thumbs up.
ejdf870 2 years ago
you are saying nothing about CyTwombly. nothing about art. nothing about painting. Only your JOB, next door. The majority never rules in art. hooray!!
MrWowforever 2 years ago
Neither are most people here saying much about CyTwombly.
ejdf870 2 years ago
...the majority never rules ...........
MrWowforever 2 years ago
Oh dear rembrandtsca, if you have an interest in art I'm afraid that you needn't bother as you will struggle. ch
theaviary 2 years ago
Junk I hate. Twombly I love...
claureic 2 years ago
incredible exhibition experience
thanx
peaceluis 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You are worried about taking pictures???? 0f WHAT?
I see no art, just junk.
rembrandtsca 2 years ago
are you mad at your own face?
MrWowforever 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
JUNK, JUNK, AND MORE JUNK.
rembrandtsca 2 years ago
thanks for telling us what you don't like. WHO CARES?
MrWowforever 2 years ago
The only thing "blooming" here is badly painted decorative wallpaper. I can't wait for the bubble to burst on this unskilled mediocrity.
gordondragonninja76 2 years ago
thanks for nothing
MrWowforever 2 years ago
Can you say "Old Fashioned." Twombly is the about as relevant as cigarettes and George Bush. Oh, the Bourgeoisie of the 20th century. So full of it.
artworldpirate 2 years ago
can you say "who cares what you think"?
MrWowforever 2 years ago
Great job!
ThroughArts 2 years ago
thx james! fantastic undercover work! :)
mhinke 2 years ago
i was there
ClickCreations 2 years ago
Comment removed
Mazurka1001 2 years ago
hey..he is not living in monseratto...me and my dad (alessandro twombly) and me (caio twombly) and my sister (maia twombly) and my mom (soledad olivera twombly) are moving there...i went there about three days ago to see all the furniture...My grandfather (cy twombly) lives in Gaeta which is in Rome...he does not live in Monseratto, my dad used to live there with my grandmother (Luisa Franchetti, which prefers being called Tatia) and my grandfather *cy twombly)
20BRaBBiT02 2 years ago
i'm doing an artist presentation on him for class. his stuff's fantastic. thanks for sharing.
TadakoXIII 2 years ago
Enjoyed this. I loved to see how the acrylic paint "behaved" in these paintings. Thanks for filming...
thePhilep 2 years ago
i think he lives in monserrato i saw him a few months a go there is a genius...
purchi 2 years ago
guy's hes my grandfather... he know lives in Gaeta and he has a amazing house..I don't visit him often and Cy actually he is 81. My dad Alessandro Twombly is 49 and my Soledad Twombly is 41. My dad is a artist and my mom is a fashion designer
20BRaBBiT02 2 years ago
omg, for realz ?!! <3
TadakoXIII 2 years ago
Superb James!
repelghosts 2 years ago
We want as an International Day of Painting! Painting and painters deserve (deserve) this appreciation for ancient and old social good!
Magnolo Priego Oliver
President of the Association of Artists' D.I.P.
Priegooliver 2 years ago
banksy isnt even a hair on a pimple on the ass of twombly.
Hey james ,any plan to cover a birkenblit opening . Even she has more fine art credibility than banksy.
magmajet 3 years ago
Dear James,
Thank you for your going undercover.
It is great, I totally enjoy it...and looking forward to seeing more.. : )
miko4art 3 years ago
was the artist there?
boogiebuddy01 3 years ago
No,
Twombly is nearly 80, and I think at this point, stays close to home in Italy. JK
jameskalm 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I prefer Banksy anyday.
movement26 3 years ago
whoopdi doo!
elioraceit 3 years ago 2
id buy one, if i had a couple million dollars
chandru1103 3 years ago
I would own a painting and that would be it. I could use it as shelter on the streets...very colorful and beautiful shelter.
chandru1103 2 years ago
good video
utuber001001 3 years ago
claureic,
I agree completely
jameslour 3 years ago
The problem here is that this type of colorful paintings do not represent a change; Twombly has been lingering on them for three or four years (with some variations). At first, 3 years ago, they were a little risky (at least to the Twombly aficionado that I am), I agree, but now they really appear decorative, comfortable and not risky at all. Not at all like the risk Guston took in 1970. But nobody's perfect, even Twombly. And thank you James, for this video...
claureic 3 years ago
Guston in 1970, 38 years ago, when they were relatively young men. Artists are not fashion designers coming out with a new line every season, contrary to popular perceptions and dubious practices.
MrWowforever 3 years ago
I didn't talk about change or risk, James did. I am just saying that Twombly has fallen into comfortable and decorative art. I, myself, am not expecting that artist behave like fashion designers as you seem to imply. I expect to be bumped off my armchair, and that is what Twombly did to everybody in 1958 and what Guston did in 1970.
claureic 3 years ago
you said the paintings don't represent a change (see your above comment), then said you didn't talk about change (in the above response). then you talk of the Twombly of 1958...50 years ago! Mr. kalm said, people don't like change, which is true, obviously. I just think it is a lot to expect of an artist to repeat an 'arrival' on the scene (Twombly) or a radical shift in iconography (Guston) every few years....that's my point here:)
MrWowforever 3 years ago
I was just replying to a remark by James who used the word change...Now, considering the status Twombly has attained over the years, I do not think it is a lot to expect of him to avoid the decorative. I hope you got my point...
claureic 3 years ago
yeah, you don't like the paintings. :)
MrWowforever 3 years ago
That's right. It was nice conversing with you, though. So long on another Kalm video...
claureic 3 years ago
I think Twombly has been forgetting the LINE lately. If you look at his early paintings, up to 1964, you see his mastery of line. His current paintings I find kind of decorative; too colorful. Not the Twombly I like, who blows you away by his virtuoso treatment of the line. The works in this video are too contrived; they lack spontaneity, they are too predictable. They just don't surprise you, don't bump you off your comfortable armchair...
claureic 3 years ago
he's in his 80's now.....tough 'context'
MrWowforever 3 years ago
Its an art world axiom that your latest show is always your worst show. No matter what they say, people dont like change. For someone with the signature style of a Twombly any variation is seen as a decline, yet that is where the true risk is, even if it gets decorative. JK
jameskalm 3 years ago
Some of these works are very sad and i can feel the pain, but with happy colors . i like em.
thanks james
hankjunior 3 years ago
Check artist Josignacio Painting
FineArtsProductions 3 years ago
keep doing what you are doing james. great videos..
arsviri1 3 years ago
thanks jameskalm for this video,covert filming in a gallery...awesome! i've just been to see his cycles and seasons exhibition at the tate modern uk and it was electric! the thing that really stikes me about this video is the noise... its like a bar on a friday night... walking through cycles and seasons was like viewing his work in a temple ...total silence!
fox408 3 years ago
Great job. I lived in NYC for 7 years, and could never afford a book on Twombly, they were ridicully expensive. Sometimes it feels like art is for rich people, you either live in NY or buy a 60 bucks catalog. Tough choice! No wonder "commoners" often feel alienated from the art world, it is clearly elitist. Until a cheap, taschen type edition on Twombly, this helps to get a more or less clear picture about a great artist recent work. Thanks!
gilsanson 3 years ago
...Why not see paintings and other visual arts in the same way - in their own right, not as representations of a 'thing'.
Just like music, art can express ideas, feelings, emotions, historical events, political viewpoints, or simply be a celebration of paint itself.
Jasper Johns painted flags, but the art wasn't about a flag - it was about the way he used paint and colour.
stephvsilk 3 years ago
People who have difficulty with abstract art, I put this idea to you...
Many people expect art to represent something, to look like some 'thing'.
We don't make these demands of musical art forms - we don't expect a song (lyrics aside) to sound like a thing. For example, we don't expect a guitar solo to sound like anything other than a guitar solo in it's own right. It doesn't have to sound like a bird singing or represent any other 'thing'... (see next post)...
stephvsilk 3 years ago
it is what it is. i saw the twombly exhibition @ tate modern in london. some i liked, some i didn't. isn't that great?
gwalkron 3 years ago
The worst "artist" of our time.
In German "art" is called "Kunst" a word derived from "können"- "to can". But what can this man especially?
VitoPossilipo 3 years ago
great job!
MrWowforever 3 years ago
Tit
stephvsilk 3 years ago
His composition is simply brilliant!
mytowelisblue 3 years ago 2
abstract art is art without the definite realist narrative (as in the classical artists or more simply photography. and on that note, photography has certainly replaced realist painting). it is no less valid in the same way that chopin is no less valid than puccini.
not everybody is qualified to discuss art (as demonstrated here). if you have no real knowledge of opera, old english, italian cheeses or theoretical physics, would you argue with somebody whos devoted their life to the subject?
abecedarianism 3 years ago
i dare any of you dismissing twombly's work to stand 6 inches from any of the quattro stagioni, or perhaps 'achilles mourning the death of patroclus', and not be completely enraptured by it. viewing his paintings in any other way is invalid.
also anybody displeased with abstract art as a whole should read gombrich's 'image and the eye', and take note of his interpretation of zenos paradox of the arrow.
abecedarianism 3 years ago
i admire your defense of mr. twombly, you are in the minority here, but i think there are many artists working today who would disagree with your position on photography replacing 'realist' painting.The work of chuck close, richard estes, marilyn minter and gerhard richter (just to skim the surface)are powerful examples of the rich dialogue between camera and artist. these things co-exist in very interesting ways.just my opinion:)
MrWowforever 3 years ago
I certainly agree with you, but you'll probably find that anybody using this style successfully has used the process or style as the subject to an extent, rather than just a form of illustration (which so many people expect from art).
and as an aside, I thought Hirst's photorealist efforts were awful. that's probably how not to do it.
abecedarianism 3 years ago
mr. hirst and mr. koons have lately produced a stlye of photorealism, more photo-shop, that i find very unrewarding in person. but i would never dismiss these camera tools from being used;its HOW something is used that counts for me, chuck close uses the camera very intelligently in his paintings. his dialogue with different coloured dots mimics the printing process itself, he makes the darkroom come alive with abstraction while maintaining the image(photo).:)
MrWowforever 3 years ago
hmmmmmm......
twomblypublishing 3 years ago
twombly and his ilk. twombly could paint your face!
kellylynn2008 3 years ago
so true
MrWowforever 3 years ago
The question "What is art?" is a question without answer. The best we can do is define our criteria as to what is or isn't art. For me, I would say a candidate piece needs to visually engaging and/or thought provoking WITHOUT needing a lengthy verbose explanation to back it up, and it be obvious that it took a certain degree of skill to create. Twombly and his ilk satisfy none of those criteria. The Emperor is naked people. This stuff is (criminally over-priced) rubbish.
punchthedog 3 years ago
Duchamps Urinal, made in 1917!, is a counter argument to your pedestrian criteria. almost 100 years ago!!!!!!!! you will probably dismiss his work, thats fine, but people have moved on......
MrWowforever 3 years ago
I don't dismiss ALL of Duchamp's work, but all he did with that urinal was put it on a plinth, name it "Fountain" and call it art. You are right in saying that people have moved on since then, but mostly in utterly ridiculous directions.
punchthedog 3 years ago
shouldn't the utterly ridiculous be allowed as an impulse to produce, along with the formalist canon. Duchamp was giving us permission, i think, to think outside the box. i'm not looking for a world full of urinals as sculpture, but following a ridiculous impulse can lead to some good stuff.......bruce nauman, robert raucshenberg, rodney graham and rachel harrison just to name a few.
MrWowforever 3 years ago
Not to place too fine a point on it but, I believe that Duchamp's contribution had as much to do with the "economics of creativity" as with aesthetics. By promoting the "ready made" he was simply shifting the practice of art making from a manufacturing based practice to a service based one. Your statement that he was "giving us permission" (a fine service to offer) undoubtedly reinforces my point. JK
jameskalm 3 years ago
I not suggesting that all art be realist, far from it. I'm just disappointed that art is no longer judged on it's merit as a stand alone piece on a wall or plinth but instead people delve into this glib metaphysical rambling that the actual appearance of the art work means little or nothing. I would suggest to you that most of the abstract/surrealist "artists" might be better off as philosophers and just use their artwork as illustrations in their books.
punchthedog 3 years ago
with all due respect, duchamps urinal is a realist piece, only in a new way. to dismiss years of work as 'metaphysical rambling' seems a little sweeping. you seem to be making a conservative argument for a prior age of plinths and paintings(non-abstract). remember that the absurdity of Dada and duchamp was a reaction to the horrors of the world wars. They weren't just being provocative, they were disgusted with the futility of old forms (history). i like colorful paintings, it's my thing
MrWowforever 3 years ago
If you placed the painting at 5:55 in Time Square and left it there for a week. Imagine then there was some voting device under it where people could give it a mark out of 100. 100 being the best painting the ever saw, and 0 utter rubbish, how do you think it would score? I think a single digit score at best. There could be two reasons for such a low score: 1) It's rubbish. 2) The vast majority of people who voted don't have the intellect to understand it. Which do you think is more likely?
punchthedog 3 years ago
art is not american idol. it's not a popularity contest. those same 100 random people would probably dismiss any Art. democracy and art don't work. democracy works best with entertainment, it appeals to base instincts. art aspires to elevate us (aesthetically, intellectually). it's not that people aren't intelligent enough to 'get it', art requires a little work (study ) to build meaning. most folks are just lazy (sorry) and think art is like entertainment, which they 'get'. art is work.
MrWowforever 3 years ago
Lets apply that logic to music. Imagine you went to a piano concerto. The pianist takes the stage and proceeds to hammer on the keyboard completely randomly with no rhythm or structure whatsoever on an out of tune piano. After 45 minutes he stops and then explains to the audience what he meant, why the piece sounded like it did. Even if his explanation was the most profound insightful intelligent thing ever said by anyone ever, would it make the concerto sound any less cacophonous. I think not.
punchthedog 3 years ago
do you know who John Cage is? you keep proposing hypothetical situations were you invent critiques around your 'event'. this is a common device, read some of the comments on this show. as far as your musical example, there are many musicians who work against traditional melody and structure. to your example, mr. cage would laugh. i know less about music history than art history, but you seem traditional in your opinions. cacophonous sounds can be thrilling. Cage opened doors, like duchamp.
MrWowforever 3 years ago
Open doors or lowered the standard? Anyway, this discussion is going nowhere. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Take it easy.
punchthedog 3 years ago
i agree. but if you think John Cage lowered the standards, 50 years ago!, my point of knowing your history has been illustrated nicely. thanks for the talk:)
MrWowforever 3 years ago
i like sun ra, and he doesn't even need to explain it
mts120 3 years ago
well said! i'm with you on this one
MrWowforever 3 years ago
that was great, thanks.
jamespcollier 3 years ago
I think I missed this show. Thanks for the chance to see it.
alexitin 3 years ago
What would happen if an unknown artist brought these same pieces to a prestigeous gallery?
Would they be accepted? Can we simply judge an image on its own merits? Cy Twombly is a very good artist. Would he have arrived by showing these first?
letsif 3 years ago
if an unknown artist brought these paintings to a gallery they would say they look to much like cy twombly's work. can we judge an image on it's own merits, what other way is there? you seem to be implying that mr. twombly is just churning them out, you are not alone here (read some of the comments here). i understand your hypotheticals but they are just wish-thinking. mr. twombly has a long career and each piece is a part of that 'actual' story, these paintings are a valuable part of that.
MrWowforever 3 years ago
twombly is a rich, wealthy, famous artist. anything less than these paintings would be dishonest.
fredericduren 3 years ago
he can basically do anything because he has established his 'name' as an artist. The art work is secondary and has nothing to do with talent or influence or inspiration. Behold the powerful forces of marketing. The name as product. It can be purchased, collected, and auctioned. The name perpetuates the work. Most unfortunately.
zevcha 3 years ago
to say that this work 'has nothing to do with talent' is most unfortunate. marketing is everywhere, in your kitchen, in your pocket and in your head....behold. cy twombly is leaving us soon and you are still blind.
MrWowforever 3 years ago
You are right product is everywhere. Tell me where the talent is in the actual painting? At this point in the artist's 'career' his assistants do most if not all the work. The talent is the powerful connections to aggressive art dealers who have a huge stake in making and guarding the name. Talent is in maintaining a value at auction and most especially in convincing the public to buy it. Learn to see with your own eyes.
zevcha 3 years ago
this work is a testament to the aging process, through the brush of an influential artist who has lived a long life. these paintings remind me of dekoonings late dementia paintings. we all die and these artists were and are fortunate(to have lived so long)and brave(aging is hard) enough to paint there ways toward that distant shore we all must face. humble your own eyes to see outside the eternal newness of the very market you cite.
MrWowforever 3 years ago
The eternal newness of the market? A complete unknown who scribbles crayon onto a canvas would not fetch millions but most certainly Mr.Twombly would. Because his work of scribbling with crayon is original? No. Because he has a history of aggressive art dealers pushing to safeguard their own and their client's investments. There is a whole history of backstabbing you know nothing about in the auction world. DeKooning would know plenty about that especially in relationship to Pollack's work.
zevcha 3 years ago
how do you know what i know?
MrWowforever 3 years ago
twomblys work sells because he has a history of making important art. you are very cynical, talking about corrupt dealers and market strategies, so american. these things exist, not just in art, were ever things are marketed. i like how mad twomblys art makes you.....its clever that way.
MrWowforever 3 years ago
Twombly's art does not illicit a negative reaction from me. What does is the many who stand in awe before it and announce that it 'moves through the language of abstraction' and write volumes of nonsense about it while he laughs away.If you were to walk into a gallery with your own scribbles you would be dismissed as derivative.
zevcha 3 years ago
zevcha, what you define as talent is cynical at worst and plain dumb
MrWowforever 3 years ago
oops
MrWowforever 3 years ago
It is not my definition of talent. The upper realms of the 'art' world thrives on everything but talent. It is aggressive and money based and can make or break you no matter who you are and how far you've come...but hey...keep the dream alive.
zevcha 3 years ago
you said talent is the connection to art dealers, you said it. how would you know how the upper realms of the art world function? you are speculating about something based on your own fears; i don't assume to understand this, you do. you don't like twomblys work. great.
MrWowforever 3 years ago
Talent should have had single quotes around it like this: 'talent' when I stated that it had more to do with marketing. The reality is akin to buying a plain white t-shirt. You can pay $8 for one or pay $1300 for one with the name Prada on it. Get it? No different in the art world. Has nothing to do with cynicism or fear or speculation. I actually don't mind Twombly but don't connect him with genius or influence. He's an expensive plain t-shirt.
zevcha 3 years ago