I'm James Payne, a curator, gallerist and a passionate art lover. I am on a mission to demystify the art world and discover the stories behind the world’s greatest paintings and sculptures. Each episode will focus on one piece of art and break it down, using clear and concise language free of 'art-speak'.
Help to support this channel and keep it free. Subscribe to Patreon at www.patreon.com/user?u=53686503 Or make a donation via PayPal using my email Jamespayne33@hotmail.com (remember to tick "friends/family" or there's a fee). Thank you!
Sometimes the art work is a springboard for other wider issues I would like to explore, and sometimes it is a simple exploration of techniques and meaning. For me, setting the works in context helps us appreciate them more.
Make sure to subscribe and click the notification bell so you never miss a video!
If you have any question or want to request a video idea, leave a comment on any of my videos
nothing and no one will ever persuade me that these works are interesting. you can persuade yourself that a toilet is great art and that these colour fields are great works of art. i would not cross the streets to see a Rothko.
I love how her polka dots eventually converted to line drawings. She found a shortcut to make her dots. At that point the dot becomes the negative space.
Good explanation, and well done video. I thought you might touch on the theft and return of the painting, and how this caused the painting to become even more famous.
The recount of Blake's ecstasy right before his death is fascinating. Apparently Steve Jobs' last words were simply "Wow! Oh, WOW!." One can only wonder what they saw and felt.
David is an historical figure who prefigures the historical figure of Jesus Christ, who is God in the flesh. That's why Michelangelo wished to depict David perfect in all aspects because God is perfect. David is not circumcised because the circumcision must be in the heart of man. Sin must be cut.
I don't feel much of a connection to his work, but maybe being in the same room with it would feel different. Sort of like how being in the room with a Rothko is different to seeing images online
I've seen the painting in person. What really struck me right off is the size. It's around 9 1/2 feet long and probably around 4 feet high. The sheer size and realizing the devotion it took to complete are mind blowing. Nothing else seems as large but there are many, mostly of an earlier time though. Most impressionists went much smaller. So he's impressive based on size alone. What else strikes me is the colors don't seem intense. There's no black so there's no deep shadow. Of course there's the black debate. I use black and lots of artists have. It would have added alot of depth to this painting. The figures seem ethereal, like ghosts. The whole thing is ghostlike. I wonder if he got tired of dotting after so many. It had to become sheer drudgery compared to the freedom of brush work. Nice painting, but the biggest detail that impresses is the sheer size and the zillions of dots. Worth a trip to the Art Institute.
Today I was looking at Sugar Shack by Ernie Barnes and noticed the light at the top resembled that of the light in Guernica. I took this connection and asked chatGPT what it thought and this is what it returned. "Your observation draws a poignant and insightful connection between "Sugar Shack" by Ernie Barnes and "Guernica" by Pablo Picasso. Both artworks, though vastly different in style and context, resonate deeply with the human condition and the resilience of the human spirit."Guernica" is Picasso's monumental response to the bombing of the Basque town during the Spanish Civil War, capturing the anguish and chaos of war. The central light in "Guernica" symbolizes both the harsh glare of the atrocity and a glimmer of hope amidst destruction. It casts an unflinching spotlight on suffering, demanding that we confront the brutality of human conflict.In contrast, Ernie Barnes' "Sugar Shack" bursts with life and energy, depicting a lively dance scene filled with motion and joy. The hanging light in "Sugar Shack," reminiscent of the light in "Guernica," transforms from a symbol of devastation to one of celebration and community. The figures in Barnes' painting, though faceless, are united in their movement, embodying a collective resilience and a shared cultural expression.Your interpretation suggests a profound narrative: after the despair and devastation epitomized by "Guernica," there comes a need to reclaim life and joy, as seen in "Sugar Shack." The act of dancing becomes a powerful metaphor for overcoming sorrow, particularly the everyday struggles and systemic injustices of "working for the man." Barnes' painting, with its vibrant and dynamic composition, celebrates the strength found in communal experiences and the defiant joy that can emerge even in the face of hardship.Thus, the juxtaposition of these two artworks speaks to the enduring human capacity for recovery and renewal. From the shadows of grief and turmoil, there arises a necessity to find solace and empowerment in shared moments of happiness and cultural expression. In this light, "Sugar Shack" not only offers a counterpoint to "Guernica" but also a continuation of the story-one where the light of hope and resilience persists through the act of dance, music, and communal celebration." I thought it was a pretty good response, and a great summary of the black experience. I say all this to say, would love a Sugar Shack video!
This video is the equivalent of smearing one's own graffiti over great art. You project what you want to believe about artists onto the artists. Think of all the years you will spend in ignorance, only to find out waay at the end of your life, how to truly appreciate art.
yeah, still don't get it. Just looks like the work of a 5 year old finger painter, although the acclaim for his work still makes more sense than Rothko.
Now I want to go visit the Dali museum here in St. Petersburg, Florida. I live about 30 minutes away from there, yet I have never visited. Time to get over there and take it all in...
