It means as much as it makes you feel. It can be divine, or it can be nothing to you. All you have to do is to be honest each time you look at the painting.
As an artist, I'm very grateful to abstract artists like Twombly who were so free in their mark-making. Modern art has come a long way, and even though not everyone understands the process or the results, all it takes is that one moment of recognition that rewards patiently persistent study and observation. It's a good philosophy to take to life as well. To me, these are not merely paintings; they are records of a questioning mind, of troubled and rhapsodic meditations.
That's fine but it doesn't mean they have larger meaning. It seems art doesn't have to actually convey anything to the viewer when pareidolia does all the work. For me, art is, without intent, not art.
@@DamnedSilly I absolutely love when people try and act like something is deeper and deeper. It’s embarrassing honestly. It’s pretentious and why many don’t respect this type of art.
I find comfort in knowing that everyone else is just as puzzled as I am about his work. I've always been extremely captivated by Twombly, and could never put into words why until now. Wonderful video!
In my opinion, something that his work always reminded me of was the markings you would find on a desk in a classroom. You can almost trace out a meaning in them, but the assignment that was being worked on at the time has been long since forgotten about by its original pupil. Another thing, and this could be a stretch, but I feel like it reminds me a lot of stone age art. The sharp lines, little colour, and placement of pretty much anything at anyplace in the piece reminds me a lot of how cave art depicts its animals in a kind of sporadic way.
In a way, I'm glad that Twombly exists because he makes me feel as if my own scribbles and drawings are, without me consciously thinking about them, depictions of my state of mind. It may seem silly, but isn't that what art is about anyway: taking things which would otherwise seem mundane and turning them into emotionally resonant works? In a way, I wonder how many Twomblys exist throughout the world: not painted by him, but by a million people who have never heard of him and perhaps never will.
I think a lot of the things people dislike about art like this is that we can't help but compare it to others. When people enter art galleries, they have preconceived ideas about what they expect to see, something *worthy* of a gallery, something *worthy* of being sold for millions, and seeing something that seems so easily reproducable by anyone, when compared to the intense realism and precise techniques of other artists, whose technical skill is beyond comparison, it almost seems unfair. And so, this is lesser art. But this is a limiting viewpoint, because there is so much we can do in art. Complexity, detail, realism are all qualities that some associate with "good" art - but the idea that art without these qualities is lesser neglects a wide spectrum of imagery just as worthy of appreciation. If we narrow our view to just the art traditionally defined as "good", we miss out on a whole lot.
@@tulip_hysteria The surface level comparison only makes sense if we assume the artists were trying to express something similar, at least roughly. If their aims were completely different, what is the point in comparing them? One is an abstract artist creating his own expressive thing, the other is aiming for a realistic depiction of something. It's like comparing Louis CK to Dostoyevsky or whatever.
I agree. But it doesn’t belong in a museum or worth millions of dollars. There are phenomenal artists, unknown, worth so much more. Support LOCAL artists, and not this shenanigan.
@@sharongillesp Who's to say what is worth and what isn't? These local artists should make their art, I believe art is an equal playing field, everyone just do whatever the hell makes sense to you, this whining about stuff like this being in museums and not fine art paintings is so backwards, the whole reason stuff like this exists is because all the boring fine art paintings went out of style. This is closer to the kind of stuff the newer generation would be able to relate to than some 18th century hyperrealist self portrait painting. It's inspiring, violent, loose, stark, captivating, minimal, how the hell does anyone not see something like this and not think of doing it themselves rather than condemning it?
Understanding the difference between representational, abstract and nonrepresentational art is a good place to begin for skeptics. Nonrepresentational art is about what it evokes in you, beneath the surface of the daily grind, the rat race, keeping up with the Joneses, etc. All the stuff that is truly you, beneath the surface, can be evoked through such art. This kind of art can reveal things that are real but can't be seen. For example, a shift in emotion from joy to melancholy with a dash of hope. That is real but where can it be seen? It can't be seen at the mall, or in your neighborhood, etc, but it can be evoked within you through art. If all you care about is being a slave to the system your whole life instead of examining yourself then that is a sad state of affairs.
@@liverpoolvseverybody3257 I think it makes sense. Every so often, on social media, people will start sharing an article about Cy Twombly and the comments will be overwhelmingly negative. I can imagine that somebody could discover Cy Twombly by joining in on these negative discussions and then, later, would look into his work further and discover an appreciation for it.
@@candlelite4939 people gave such bullying responses! I would love to see your 7 Year olds art. It's not about good or bad It's not about like or don't like It's about what is successful
I worked at Museum where several Cy Twombly works were shown, I'd see these paintings day in an day out for several months. From the first day to the last day of the exhibit you realise there is nothing to be understood in his works, nothing, no redeeming value, no message, nothing. With some Artists if you spend enough time with and around their works inevitably you'll find the angle and what they had in mind. Twombly's works are voids, about as complex as that. He was at the right place at the right time, probably had some charisma and got on with the right people to get his works shown.
Thank you 👏 I absolutely agree. I think his real muse was the fable of The Emperors New Clothes and that’s all he was…and he knew it, and knew he could maintain success doing it - all the while being totally amused by himself behind the scenes. Lol.
I went to Houston to the Twombley Museum. Works like those shown in this video were huge large BIG. His Green Series stunned me more. I'm 80 now. I still paint and Twombley 's influence shows, not in my style but in the open structure. I'm forever grateful to Twombley.
Best explanation of abstract art for me - think of it like an abstract noun (like fear) vs a concrete noun (like snow). That turned the light on for me. 😊 If it evokes an “abstract” sensation, thought, or feeling for me then I find it effective. Otherwise - not for me, though I am always interested in the use of different mediums.
I worked for 25 years at the Art Gallery of New South Wales in Sydney, and the director at the time pushed to buy an enormous Twombly triptych based on Turner's Temeraire painting. Everyone poo poo'd it at the time, but it turned out to be a fantastic picture, and the public came to love it once they saw it on the walls. It was one of those instances where an artwork if looked at in the flesh can change people's perceptions of a piece.
My take, for what it's worth: Twombly’s Leda brilliantly captures the brutality of non-consensual sexual conquest. We see the wings aggressively beating with primal passion, the violent repetitive thrusting of the hard, swordlike penis, the blood and fecal remains of forced penetration, the sweat and semen of arousal, the victim’s unwillingly exposed vagina/anus (the "hearts") and watery tears of submission. Such a ruthless, no-holds-barred representation of rape makes the Cezanne and Boucher paintings of the same scene look kitschily tame by comparison. The window in the painting grounds the work in a space, whether it be bedroom, prison, or frame of the painting itself. It also serves to distance us, give our minds room in which to dwell on the basis for such obscenity, to place such a horrific deed within an objectified critical context of tragedy rather than a purely emotional one.
I always felt like Twombly was scamming us, I would look for meaning or something of interest in his work, some of his work is void of anything, as I got older I realized how hard it is to actually pull that off. I am still unsure if he was scamming us or not but every couple of years I look over his work again and think about it. There are not many artists who keep me coming back and make me feel stupid because either I don't understand it or I am falling for the scam and actually love it. Who knows?
It's the opposite of "scamming". Twombly was expressing his truth _regardless_ of what anyone might think of it. These are big pieces, executed with a whole lot of physical gusto. Dude was serious about his art. He put his whole life into it. How can that be a scam?
@@biocykle I think that scam is not in the artist, but in the people who convinced him and others that his doodles are great art. Only to make money of it and, maybe, laugh when someone finds deeper level of ''meaning'' in this. There's art that I like and art that I don't. Also art that I don't even understand. But if I can't tell if it's art or rubbish - it's rubbish. If somenone needs to tell you that something is art, because you can't tell for yourself, then there is a field for scam, isn't it?
I feel exactly the way you feel about almost unlocking the understanding of a Twombly. That was how i felt the first time seeing one and how i feel now.
I've studied art for decades. I love art and highly enjoy abstract art - as well as "normal" art and modern art. I have an open mind but really, Twombly just doesn't do it for me and I really can't get into it at all.
I feel like the more high winded, philosophical, obtuse and academic/ rhetorical lecturing required to justify a particular work of arts relevance to the viewer, then the more skeptical we should be. I doubt if many of these abstract artists could pull off a convincing portrait if their life depended on it. I think a lot of this type of art is designed to make the viewers feel stupid. Like, geez I dont know what the hell I'm supposed to be impressed by, so I better just shut up and not risk exposing what. A big fat ignorant, unsophisticated dummy I am.
I don’t think artists like this necessarily get off on making people stupid. I think maybe the purveyors of this kind of art perhaps do. As an artist, I think the satisfaction from making this kind of art is in how personally relaxing and easy it is. More about the process than the finished product. I’m a figurative surrealist artist, my paintings get compared to Dalí a lot, but they are so difficult. The process is sometimes excruciating but the final result makes it worth it
@@RapidBlindfolds funny thing is, i actually kinda like Twomblys work. Also that of arshile gorky, matta. But i think you said it yourself, relaxing snd easy. The early absstractionists were trying to do something different,.. rebellious i suppose. But if you look at their attempts at anything figurative or naturalistic it's quite obvious they just didn't put in the time and hard work it takes to get there. The problem, i think is how this work gets put up on a pedastool, as if the mere fact of its being totally baffling puts it outside the realm of objective criticism. I just feel it's a bit of a con, on some level.
@@ryanembry9875 yes ‘as if the mere fact that puts its being totally baffling puts it outside of objective criticism’ puts it very well. There’s a framework which has always stuck with me which Vladimir Kush (hacky Dali wannnabe imo but good writer) wrote about. He sort of defines a spectrum of art that on one end demands a high level of engagement/effort from the viewer and then on the other end requires a high level of skill and effort from the artist. Quoting him “art that leaves us in speechless admiration (realism) or suggests we solve a puzzle made of symbols (abstract art)”. In old master painting, it is the artist who does all the work of learning complicated glazing techniques, how to work in layers and not rush, anatomy, scumbling, how to capture light etc. so much so that the audience is rendered passively overwhelmed by the skill and power of their creation. Whereas low effort abstract art like Twombly demands the audience to fill in the gaps imaginatively on some level, hence all the baggage of critical theory that abstract and postmodern art is associated with. I love matta too btw some of his stuff is just incredible
His work is just an absolute emotional and intellectual nothing for me. Which is okay, other people will derive what they will, or at least profess to.
The only problem I have with art like this is that name recognition is almost the only thing it’s riding on. Someone high up in the art world has verified this artist as great, which is just nepotism. If you took the name Cy Twombly away it could just as well be a sketch from a 5 year old magneted to the refrigerator door.
and? whats your point? put that picture a 5 year old did. frame it and put it on the wall. it'll look great. it would be an honest expression of unconscious thought. the fuck it i like this colour and i like how the pencil moves when i do spirals so i'm going to do it. why cant that be art?
I forever love Twombly & I would like to relay a short story as to why I first fell in love… so a friend & I are waking up a little hungover on a Sunday at his place in Houston & we impulsively decide to each take a half hit of acid before going to grab a burger. Midway through eating, we feel the acid taking hold & decide it’s time to head back to his place. As we’re meandering back, half lost, we came upon the Rothko chapel (to which I had already been) & I began telling my buddy about the stark paintings of Rothko that adorn the so-called Rothko chapel; adjacent to the Rothko chapel, we saw the Twombly Gallery & decided to stop in. I can reasonably assert that the aggressive beauty we stumbled upon of Twombly’s floor to ceiling canvases was quite literally breathtaking. Mouth agape, I stood inches away from unadulterated emotion on canvas as I tried to make sense of it all. Maybe it’s for the best I could not quite make sense of what I saw, but I certainly will never forget that experience. It was a multi-room gallery devoted entirely to Twombly & its amazing. I cannot recommend enough stopping by if You find yourself in the Houston area.
Thanks for sharing your Twombly story, kind of have one of my own... I live in the greater Houston area and back in '95 I was in town killing some time until meeting up with friends later that evening. Anyway, at some point I started getting a pretty bad migraine headache and just wanted to go somewhere nearby which was quiet, without a lot of people, where I could rest a while and not be bothered, and the Menil on a late Saturday afternoon turned out to be just the place. I was past the point where ibuprofen, which has always helped if I take it when the headache is first coming on, would do any good. I walked down the hallway to the Cy Twombly Retrospective exhibit that was showing at the time and sat down in the gallery featuring his large chalkboard paintings, fully expecting I'd either be lying on the sofa hoping someone would put me out of my misery, or rushing to the nearest exit to throw up my lunch, but surprisingly, after about a half hour of meditating on the paintings, my headache completely disappeared and I felt fine, never before or since have I had that happen when a migraine was that far along. I'd already been familiar with, and an admirer of, Twombly's art since around 1991 while attending art school at UH, but the experience gave me a much deeper appreciation of his work. I've also been to the Twombly Gallery several times since its completion.
Artists like Twombly are door openers. For how much he gets disrespected I give massive respect to him. Doors are difficult to find and take courage to open.
This is pretty much how I feel about his work, but calmer. When I first saw a piece of his I tore it to shreds; belittling it and calling it a waste of materials, but I kept coming back to him, looking longer and longer. Now I'm a fan, but against my will. My elitist brain hates his work, but my eyes can't stop staring. It's a funny love-hate affair and I guess that's also part of the fun 😅
Yes, indeed; and, very well said. Try as I might, I cannot seem to quite figure out Twombly's work...which, honestly, frustrates me to death...?! It also makes me feel like being rather 'stupid'...given the fact that he is such a well known...extremely rich and famous/big selling artist. Art for art's sake, I guess...and, not necessarily with any meaning.../or, at least, not too much meaning. Quite honestly, whenever I see his artworks...I tend to think, quite invariably, crap, crap, and, yet, more CRAP...! Then, I think, to myself...no, maybe, there's something I'm seriously missing here...surely, not all of his admirers can be wrong.../and, why on earth would very important galleries...including National galleries...buy/own complete crap?! Somehow none of it makes any sense...not unless he was one of the most truly successful art world con artists that ever yet lived. Actually, it sort of reminds me of that children story...where 'the emperor has no clothes on'...if enough people say he is wearing clothes...then, everybody else tends to agree...even if they themselves can see he has no clothes on...a sort of conspiracy/and, denial by the masses. Who wants to be the odd person out...to go tell the truth...due to fearing that the masses might just turn on, and, then, totally destroy them...as to tell the truth...is the same as to openly admit that we've 'all' been made total fools of.
@@PaulRamnora very well stated. The question I always have is, who is the person behind his success? Because if they have influence (they do) they promote any artist between their wealthy friends. The winner for Twombly is the recognizability (surely the swirls, not the earlier ones. If you see that earlier “work” you couldn’t tell by who that was, but the swirls, yeah, that’s a Twombly. And the Colours, that’s the only thing going and good marketing. No need to be a psychologist about it trying to dissect the manuscript. Anyone could scribble something on paper and again a psychologist can equally talk like this about your scribbles, why then would Cy’s scribbles be different than yours? Right: because he is marketed as being a somebody. Cheers
Wow this video made me realise why Twombly is just simply awesome. A complete new way to look at modern art. Now, I would say I'd like you to write about Anselm Kiefer and his works on printmaking. That would be huge 🙂
To play devil's advocate, Twombly's only worthwhile contribution to the world of art is irony. He should be a source of inspiration to artists worldwide, because if he can do that scribbled nonsense and become famous, then anyone with even a moderate level of intellect and creativity can. Believe in yourself and explore ideas you believe nobody has thought of. It's all about carving about a niche, then selling the idea claiming it's new or different. An overrated, untalented artist is still an artist, and if he can display ideas and make the bag, more power to him.
This is so accurate about most art. Pretty much the reason I can’t stand any pretentious art person that thinks they are better than you because they “understand” the painting or feel the painting. It’s possible it evokes emotions. It’s not possible that because of scribbles you are more cultured.
Seeing quite a few comments likening this 'artist' to Dali and Picasso, difference is Dali and Picasso's work showed a technical competency being utilised to distill the essence of a subject in abstract form or portray the most fantastic heights of fantasy. Twombly on the other hand shows none of this, his work lacks any depth or meaning save the nonsense read into it by vapid art critics, half of his work he couldn't even be bothered to title. His entire career has been one immense swindle.
Excellent video…from Twombly and Mitchell to DeFeo and Altoon, the more open you are to experience the piece the more it reveals itself to the viewer…like shaman, there are messages in these works; within the energy and the composition alike.
Yeah, that's what they mean, but factually they are wrong. A five-year-old cannot pull off a layered, large scale abstract composition, not to mention one dealing with a mythological subject.
@@biocykle- There is nothing layered or indeed any normal notion of composition in this work whatsoever. It's the emperor's new clothes. It is a scam. They are relying on people pretending "they get" so as not to appear stupid. However, there is nothing in this to get. It is creatively redundant and intellectually vapid nonsense.
To me, the difference in impact from say, Pollocks paintings, comes from the chosen medium, the pencil shows the gesture precisely, you need to PUSH on pencils and crayons. Paint is fluid; it has a mind of its own
Scale is important in this work. If the scibbles were the size of an excersize page sure, the idea a toddler "could" be able to copy his work is more reasonable. But you didn't mention his paintings are 4 meters high! It's a huge labourious physical movement to make those continuous loops while moving along the floor or scaffolding. It's in no way an experience of "this is easy" walking through an exibition of his work! It's airy, it's choreographic, it's cryptic, and expressive but never aggressive or insensitive or some exibit of only base emotions. They feel quite thoughtful to me. I saw a wonderful exibition of only Turner and Twombly together, huge and quite daring, and was so happy seeing both their work in the same space in dialogue. It really worked well, very intelligently pulled off. I really love his big paintings, he's very much the seasoned and experienced painter that can afford the confidence of mapping things out in his mind and then letting the process take him where he needs to go. The signum of a life long experience painting with awareness. I didn't really understand this video and your approach at all. Did you never see an exibition of his irl?
What a great video, love how you presented Twombley & your journey delving into his work. For those complaining about what art costs or about money laundering, I will say, who cares?! People get so angry, because they are pathetically jealous. If you don't appreciate art, that's fine. If you encounter something that doesn't move or appeal to you, move on to something that does, there is plenty out there!
I saw Cy Twombly’s art at the Getty Center in Los Angeles yesterday. I’m trying to understand what everyone sees in his art. In truth I’m insanely jealous that his work is famous and not mine. It infuriates me. I don’t think I’ve ever been so pissed off while visiting a museum before. All I can see at the moment is a masterful trickster trying to manipulate what he must think are stupid people. That was his art. Somehow getting people to pay millions of dollars for garbage. If he were alive today I would say all of this to his face if I were given the opportunity. I want to buy one of his books and rip the pages apart I’m so angry. At the same time he’s inspiring because he made millions of dollars with scribbles and proved it can be done which frustrates me even more. I want to cry. Damn it. That is the art.
to be honest to yourself means also to leave your child behind as soon as danger comes. just because we are animals doesn't mean we should behave like such.
right? i'm so happy i discovered this, but also sad that i wasn't able to sooner! the algorithm needs to push this one harder bc it deserves to more appreciation.
Never heard ofTwombly before, but I have to say that I went through the same stages of experimentation as he did. Pretty much exactly. I like his stuff almost as much as my own.
He’s my favorite artist something about his work that just makes me feel some type of way that I can’t explain..& quite frankly, I wouldn’t want an explanation. That would ruin it..
I'm convinced that this dude was taking the piss as a way to satirise the direction abstract art was going in, and show how far some people will go to draw out meaning from things that are declared as art If this is right, this guy really is an art legend
Its this type of work that makes many distain modern art. I'd be more inspired by scribbles a toddler I knew made. The idea that this can be high art is what made me wait so long to start painting myself.
Twombly's work is like an idea to me, it inspires me to put his work in motion like the words and letters in academy. I imagine that they are all moving and making different words and phrases. It doesn't mean much to me it is just elevating Edit: I can also hide silly funny words in my art and no one would know unless they really REALLY look into it
I love and respect your insights on almost every artist you analise. However, Twombly to me, as is Pollock and others, is the kind of “artist” whose work you have to give a long and abstruse explanation to validate it. To me, it’s just scribbling without even some kind of effort or composition. At least Pollock for example, had some kind of unity and good colour management. But that’s me. Thanks for your excellent videos
To me, the rhythm his work has is very meditative. It's very easy to get immersed in. If you're someone who visits an art museum and just wants to see as many "pretty" paintings you've already seen on postcards as possible, Twombly isn't for you. If you're someone who likes art that draws you in, makes you think, makes you feel something, Twombly is sublime. If you're someone who goes to an art museum and says, "My kid could do that," just get out. That mentality is childish and offensive. It's good practice to go in with the mindset that people who are far more cultured, far more educated than you are, chose what's one the walls. Learn from them. "My child could do that, and modern art is just a racket," is intellectually lazy as fuck.
Or not. I’ve seen a number of Twombly’s large scale paintings on exhibit over the years and have never had my curiosity prompted by any of them ever. I don’t buy his claim of spontaneous marking or his high brow pretensions at all. His art is airy, empty and inept. Italy can keep him.
Ok I’m usually pretty liberal and introspective about 20th century and contemporary art but this is garbage (to me..)…(“maybe that reaction is the point” I can see someone commenting…)…what is a good and a bad artist of this particular movement?…this question pops up to mind
Yes! I would love a video breakdown of an art critic explaining why 1 abstract piece of art is pure genius and the other is amateur and worth nothing. Maybe then I would understand or at least believe that THEY truly understand the difference.
Whenever I hear someone say, "My child could do that" I'm tempted to say, "Well then, why don't you have your kid do it? Have you seen what these paintings sell for?"
I'm pretty sure I understand the Idea behind Leda and the Swan... maybe I just want to belive that idk. But it feels like exactly the way I looked at the world and life in the years of my depression. So ironic, dumb, pointless, embarrassing, lost, empty, ridiculous and without a anwer. So much so you can't put it in words, it makes you insane. You want to destroy it or draw something beautiful over it. But you can't, because you are captured in life and in times of depression, you can't give in to illusions. This is what life really is without any subjectiv illusions in my opinion. Accepting this is nearly impossible likewise with accepting this painting for what it is. Such a smart way of expressing himself to everyone, wish I could do this. love it.
Right,your opinion, have you ever really Delved into why Cy Twombly ‘s work is so valuable?There must be a reason. His work speaks to my soul ...I feel so honored. I am an artist. He is my inspiration .
@@parsifal7300 exactly, people blame the artists too much, but its actually capitalisms doing. the art is fine, its just the people behind the scenes fucking shit up
I'm glad somebody's tried to interpret this work for me, I don't see much in art like this (even though I'm not opposed to it.) I get that he was hastily using gestures at the end (when his arm might've been tired?) But it seems like doodling to me. Perhaps if there was lots of colour or something I could think it was pretty or...? It's got me thinking though.
It’s because they were the first to do this, you can’t do this today and sell it as art. The years have put interest in his name more than his art. I could show you a 100 paintings similar and you wouldn’t be able to tell them different from twombly. Yet, because he did it In that time and documented his work in his name, it’s sort of in a way collected interest because people honestly first considered randomness art
I think the “why” behind our attraction to a certain piece and artist doesn’t do much to serve us as the viewer. If we want to speak on it intellectually then perhaps but I counter with a quote from Edward Hooper “if you could say it in words, there would be no need to paint”.
I'd say my 6-year old daughter could do this, but thank goodness she lacks the cynisim. People who think there is any sense or value in these ridiculous scribblings fall victim to the story bias, a common logical fallacy. If everyone is an artist, nobody is. If everything is art, art is dead. Just my personal opinion.
I agree with you about the cynicism of how art is marketed, but in all honesty, no sarcasm, if your daughter (or my nephews) filled fifteen twenty-foot canvases with her art and then put it in a museum, I would happily come and see it. Better yet, try it yourself with one. Get stuck in some plaster, pastels and pencils and get that canvas full. Take a video and pop it on RU-vid. Make it with your daughter if you like. I’ll gladly come by and give you a like and a few dollars as an “entrance fee”.
@@rhinochaser3193 It’s exactly what I studied. I’m also an elementary school teacher and my smallest students make the same thing, so…you are wrong. Just because my critique is different than yours doesn’t make me the ignorant one.
Just found your channel and awesome awesome awesome and great mix production element and as a percussionist that chooses drum set awesome to hear drum set in the background I'm voice texting bear with me
I KNOW anybody could paint/draw these … what’s phenomenal are the loonies explaining its validity as art. Because I’m sure if I paid a copywriter enough money to explain my child’s scribbling, my child would be considered a genius.
I appreciate the video but I remain unsold on Twombly. I think his popularity is almost entirely from his deep friendship with Gagosian, who opened most of his galleries in Europe with Twombly shows. In a few decades, after Gagosian is gone, Twombly will lose his popularity too.
Truly the most innovative artists to have ever lived. Da Vinci? Van Gogh? Picasso? They are talentless hacks compared to the genius of Cy Twombly. Truly the meaning of life has been unearthed in these timeless masterpieces!
@@fairyeater expressionism is good. Munch is a great artist. Twombly isnt expressionism though. I bet youre assuming im some conservative who hates modern art. Im not. I like modern art as long as it looks good if put on a wall and looks like at least some effort went into making it. Twombly's stuff is just ugly and insulting. It looks like crayon or chalk scribbles. There's literally no skill whatsoever and it doesnt look good on a wall.
@@arte0021 i’m assuming you don’t like abstractionism, not impressionism. there is a profound amount of beauty to be found in art, sure, but that is not its pure purpose, so gauging its quality by “how pretty it looks on a wall” is kind of conservative. i have to admit i’m not always fully on board with twombly either but the way he uses different mediums and color shows that he is very skilled at what he does. as always, if you think you could do better get to work!
As an artist myself, I only wonder what Twombly did that has created so much justifying from so many people as a result of the obvious hype from his agents.
well Gary i see your portfolio website and the fact you split your "art" up into figurative, abstract and portraits tells me you are a blue chip artist. you make art specifically for those "galleries" you see on the high street. sure call yourself an artist. but you are not one. at least Cy made what he considered to be his voice and not something just to sell
Good points but in my humble opinion, Twombly's work is not very good, and doesn't do anything for me. Its like picking up a piece of discarded scrap paper from a bin outside of a grade 2 classroom, why would I get a profound emotional response from that paper? I enjoy most of the abstract expressionist artists but Twombly...
I recently found some drawings in a remote rural area which while definitely not Twombly, is also captivating for unknown reasons, as you describe. Any thoughts on who I may ask about this?
lol. "Graffiti Like" nah...curious to know what you think graffiti is? Hmm...when art critics can only talk about mark making and materials because of the lack of actual substance. Then I guess people say, well it's nonrepresentational and abstract. Well so was Kandinsky, Rothko and Mondrain, but their work has a lot of substance. Their art can have a much deeper meaning and purpose. Even if one does not like the form of how those ideas are represented, at least they have ideas and theories to actually talk about. I'm sure there is something to learn from Cy, at least that's what I want to believe. At the same time there is something to be learned of anything that exists. A rock, roadkill, a footprint, bird poop, the birth of an elephant, for me the question is how does said object influence my existence, or not? Does this allow me to grow or does this object add any value or enhance my life in a meaningful way? I want to believe there can be something here for me. I looked up documentaries, read some articles of Cy's work, watched other art talks. Often times I wait to know the title of a work, leave some time for discovery. Then when I finally look at the title, for some bread crumb of direction, I get "untitled." I can't help but to roll my eyes. No, there is nothing of substance here for me. Just marks, colors, and disguised handwriting.
thats your opinion of the mans work. it's kinda wrong and you need to evaluate some hidden chudness here, but its your opinion. my opinion is that i think your murals are kinda bland, but thats okay. we al lhave opinions
I really like some works by Twombly, but I dislike others. I notice certain common complaints when it comes to people disliking abstract or contemporary art. A lot of them tend to revolve more around the social status that gets attached to the art, for example, the money that it sells for or the respect that the artist gets. I think some of these factors detach people from the naive emotional state that you have to be in to enjoy art and make them view it with detached suspicion. The elitism of the art world is quite off-putting, but are we able to look beyond that and enjoy art anyway? Do we need a system of social status to give acclaim to good art? Would it really be so bad if you found deep meaning in a crude painting that genuinely had been painted by a young child?
This is a little pushed. Like trying to understand something you really don’t need to. It’s an artistic expression. Personal at the moment, influenced by his own emotions, experiences, and impulses. This type of painting or art making has too narrow of the window to open and speak to public. It’s HIS state of mind.
the whole point is inspiration and people miss that, there's also a sense of starkness and violence to his paintings that people wouldn't know about unless they tried to recreate it
Thanks for the video. I find some of Twonbly's work very compelling (though I also don't know exactly why) other's, the modern stuff like the bright red scribble is not compelling, indeed rather appalling and unpleasant to look at.
If you look at it its like a signature. Twombly is in there the way Picasso or Dali are in their works. Twombly is as present is Harington or Warhol are in their paintings. Its stating things for you to feel - exactly like Rothco
This just popped up in my recommendations, looks like the YT algorithm is finally showing you some love. I can tell you put a lot of work in the video, but man, this stuff is complete garbage. There is no redeeming quality to it whatsoever. It’s not even about whether a child could create it or not. It’s just bad. You say what’s cool about it is that it looks like an idea is about to emerge from those scribbles, but, I feel you confuse your search for meaning with actual meaning. Unless it was the explicit desire of the artist to evoke this sensation of almost finding a meaning, there is nothing valuable here to me. I’m sorry if I’m being too harsh, I really find this art quite offensive.
