@hallstromfineart Newman was meticulous about the scale of his zips/negative space relative to each other. When he says scale I am pretty sure he means the scale of each part of the piece in respect to the shape and size of the canvas.
Malevich just wanted to put painting to its end, which of course could be just one, and Newman opened a whole new field of expression. And no, it's no BS, because I myself experienced it when first seeing one of Newman's paintings. And some other person did, too, at a completely different exhibition but with the same painting "Prometheus Bound". I was standing quite close to it and the woman guarding the exhibition got nervous and got close behind me, when suddenly she yelled "There is ...
Equinox 1969. I would love to know how you arrived at such a high assessment of Barney's work, ranking his accomplishment above Picasso's, Matisse's, DeKooning's, Monet's and Bonnard's.
I agree. he was one of the first post-war artists to lay the groundwork of what a few years later would be called abstract expressionism. the first american movement that tried to break away from the influence of european artists
...something I have seen it!" And yes there is something in these paintings, something you cannot deduce from any reproduction, the subject. These titles are not picked randomly. Just go and do it without any prejudice.
Equinox1969 That is a great point, about seeing them in person. I can't tell how many Rothko reproductions in books and online that I have seen that are just ugly. There is nothing like the real thing!
Newman, for when Donald Judd is too challenging and exciting and you need something a bit blander He was a cute man, though, nice bow tie, and however light his anarcho-humanist formalism was, he at least managed just enough formal tension to avoid being one of Fried and Greenberg's self-satisfied riskless hard-edge hotel lobby modernists. Got to give him *some* credit for that.
Interestingly, when you listen to Newman speaking and the listen to Phili Guston's voice, they have almost the same voice...I guess it is the voice of genius...
But what's really troubling is that you use your personal experience and that of one other person to establish the rule that Newman is the greatest artist of the 20th century. You need to make a better argument than that.
I think art like this, should have zero explanation, the more attempts on describing what it is, takes it further away from free thought, which I believe the art is created in. Creativity comes from NOT thinking.. So explaining it after is pointless. See it, appreciate it, admire it. Don't explain it. .. Maybe?!? Lol
I think whether the artist himself chooses to explain it or not should be up to him and should be considered a part of his artistic expression, part of his paintings and his message
If you're serious: Where's the accomplishment, Equinox? And how is this different from what Malevich did a good half century before? "It's a 'Zip', not a stripe" is the kind of statement from any artist, politician or salesman (on camera) that should raise your BS antenna.
*A zip's function is bringing two parts together.* A stripe doesn't do that. *A stripe is known for separating or categorizing parts.* Hence when you look at his paintings and think "is this line-like thingy a door way to somewhere? or is it a stripe that separates the one bigger part into two smaller parts?" the answer is, nope. It is the thing that brings the two parts together. Then u go on to analyse the brightness and color combinations in the painting, to figure out what is being portrayed there. The usual stuff.
I don't think anyone could argue you out of loving BN paintings, but you didn't stop there. You're also assuming that I haven't spent a fair amount of time looking at the work in the flesh over many years. I have; and the overblown scale and pompous titles and pretentious quotes can't conceal how lightweight it is.
His paintings being sold at millions and the other artists of his own time period who praised him, beg to differ with you. *Even the night sky filled with stars, looks like rubbish, to someone who is floating 10 feet deep in the sewage.*
The question was Mr. Newman "did you want mustard or mayonnaise on your ham sandwich?"
cant get enough of these insights just now
The greatest artist of the 20th century, and one of the greatest of all time. Thanks for uploading this one, it's deeply appreciated!
Well, you're absolutely correct!
@hallstromfineart Newman was meticulous about the scale of his zips/negative space relative to each other. When he says scale I am pretty sure he means the scale of each part of the piece in respect to the shape and size of the canvas.
this interview can be seen in the documentary film: "painters painting"
Malevich just wanted to put painting to its end, which of course could be just one, and Newman opened a whole new field of expression. And no, it's no BS, because I myself experienced it when first seeing one of Newman's paintings. And some other person did, too, at a completely different exhibition but with the same painting "Prometheus Bound". I was standing quite close to it and the woman guarding the exhibition got nervous and got close behind me, when suddenly she yelled "There is ...
Equinox 1969. I would love to know how you arrived at such a high assessment of Barney's work, ranking his accomplishment above Picasso's, Matisse's, DeKooning's, Monet's and Bonnard's.
@hallstromfineart because the size of the canvas may contribute to the scale
newman was a genius even to this day people are talking about his work,it brigs out raw passion in people who are for or against his works.
I agree. he was one of the first post-war artists to lay the groundwork of what a few years later would be called abstract expressionism. the first american movement that tried to break away from the influence of european artists
lol
Newman is not a genius in terms of his art.
Is he related to Andy 'Thunderclap' Newman?
...something I have seen it!" And yes there is something in these paintings, something you cannot deduce from any reproduction, the subject. These titles are not picked randomly. Just go and do it without any prejudice.
Equinox1969 That is a great point, about seeing them in person. I can't tell how many Rothko reproductions in books and online that I have seen that are just ugly. There is nothing like the real thing!
He's smashed
Good or you and your Zip on your birthday Barnett.
lol
Newman, for when Donald Judd is too challenging and exciting and you need something a bit blander
He was a cute man, though, nice bow tie, and however light his anarcho-humanist formalism was, he at least managed just enough formal tension to avoid being one of Fried and Greenberg's self-satisfied riskless hard-edge hotel lobby modernists. Got to give him *some* credit for that.
You’re right about the cute. For a bald old man in a bow tie well into his jowlhood he was inexplicably beautiful. I can’t stop looking at him.
Interestingly, when you listen to Newman speaking and the listen to Phili Guston's voice, they have almost the same voice...I guess it is the voice of genius...
Newman is a genius? HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA
What year was this?
Redžep ‘72
@@ts121084 that's impossible; he died in 1970
Barnett Newman has accomplished what none of these really has, he has freed painting of having to be pictorial to have a subject.
But what's really troubling is that you use your personal experience and that of one other person to establish the rule that Newman is the greatest artist of the 20th century. You need to make a better argument than that.
lol
It literally looks like a shit school gcse art project that I imagine the teachers reply would have been '' you must try harder ''
ok replicate one and ill buy it off you. easy money.
As much as I like his work, his droning voice drives me into a coma.
go play CoD and watch LoTR
I think art like this, should have zero explanation, the more attempts on describing what it is, takes it further away from free thought, which I believe the art is created in. Creativity comes from NOT thinking.. So explaining it after is pointless. See it, appreciate it, admire it. Don't explain it. ..
Maybe?!? Lol
I think whether the artist himself chooses to explain it or not should be up to him and should be considered a part of his artistic expression, part of his paintings and his message
@@VideosOnOff precisely, I couldn't agree more. 👌🏾
i cant see the beauty on it. ok lets say its meaningful, but fck who would buy that?
anyone with half a brain
Money launderers
If you're serious: Where's the accomplishment, Equinox? And how is this different from what Malevich did a good half century before?
"It's a 'Zip', not a stripe" is the kind of statement from any artist, politician or salesman (on camera) that should raise your BS antenna.
*A zip's function is bringing two parts together.*
A stripe doesn't do that. *A stripe is known for separating or categorizing parts.*
Hence when you look at his paintings and think "is this line-like thingy a door way to somewhere? or is it a stripe that separates the one bigger part into two smaller parts?" the answer is, nope. It is the thing that brings the two parts together.
Then u go on to analyse the brightness and color combinations in the painting, to figure out what is being portrayed there. The usual stuff.
I don't think anyone could argue you out of loving BN paintings, but you didn't stop there. You're also assuming that I haven't spent a fair amount of time looking at the work in the flesh over many years. I have; and the overblown scale and pompous titles and pretentious quotes can't conceal how lightweight it is.
Worse; by comparison, shit actually has a purpose.
You don't fuck about with Barnett.
first painting?? nigga thats a line
This guy made pretentious rubbish, not art.
His paintings being sold at millions and the other artists of his own time period who praised him, beg to differ with you.
*Even the night sky filled with stars, looks like rubbish, to someone who is floating 10 feet deep in the sewage.*
@@1..0w0..3 No, money launderers bought his easy art.
@@1..0w0..3 Money laundering
The zip concept is an embarrassment
It's an orange stripe over a brown background. Some may call it art, but actually it's shit.
lol