I’m not particularly fascinated by cubism. But I love the audacious
spirit in its invention. To me Picasso
is not necessarily a great painter, perhaps even an average one but he is a
truly great ‘artist’.
Recently I visited a special exhibit, show casing Picasso’s
work at the Barnes in Philadelphia. Most often when I visit museums I just
enjoy the paintings as a whole. This time I felt as If I was transported into
his studio.
I watched as he broke off a piece of charcoal, heard him
blow the charcoal dust away from the image he had produced, tweak it a bit with
his pinky finger and so on. It might
have just been my hyper active imagination but if it made the experience richer
then so be it!
When I was first introduced to art history, I was surprised
as how dismissive the western art historians have typically been about stylized,
two dimensional and decorative arts of other cultures. It seemed to me that art
from cultures that ignored accurate replication of nature or did not keep perspective
in mind, like in the western art culture, were quiet often classified as
something that was inferior in technique and skill.
Therefore the emotive expression of a Neanderthal upon his
cave walls, the highly decorative Persian and oriental works, the stylized
human figures of the Africans, the two dimensional miniature pieces of my own
Indian heritage are amongst the examples of work that had been classified as
unrefined and entry level.
This was the predominant notion that prevailed in the
western art world at the time of Pablo Picasso. However, like many open-minded
artists he too was influenced by the forms and norms of other cultures particularly
the simplicity of the stylized stick figures produced by the Africans.
At the time Picasso’s geometric and two-dimensional cubist
ideas, was not tested nor was he famous enough to proclaim it as a new trend in
the art world.
To deviate from the norm, to have a thought process that is
unconventional and to be fearless of ridicule is in my mind an act of
courageous innovation.
Even when I’m not a great fan of his work, by destabilizing
the set mental concept of ‘right’ way to produce art, I think, he paved the way
for many artists to make their own mark upon the world.
Perhaps this is why
he deserves to be called a great ‘artist’.
No comments:
Post a Comment