Показать сообщение отдельно
Старый 08.07.2008, 14:24 Язык оригинала: Русский       #10
Гуру
 
Регистрация: 16.04.2008
Сообщений: 1,213
Спасибо: 1,422
Поблагодарили 7,269 раз(а) в 947 сообщениях
Репутация: 5499
По умолчанию

Цитата:
Сообщение от LCR Посмотреть сообщение
I love painting, and I think so: the greater the artist, the less he needs to make his exhibition "invented".
Accordingly, a case of real artists, curators and directors, there is nothing to do but to usurp his greatness, or show really needs to "feed", but this show has nothing to do to me
Rare case where I can not agree with you. In my opinion, of how conceived exhibition, depends very much. The most glaring example - the exhibition Filonova in St. Petersburg and Moscow: the same work in different exhibition design look quite different. Exhibition in the Russian Museum was, in my opinion, an order of magnitude stronger than in Moscow. Or two or three years ago in the Luxembourg Gardens was an exhibition of Modigliani, I saw him before many times, but the last remembered, but the rest - no. How different looks Munch in Oslo and Bergen (if anyone does not know: Munch quite a long time lived in Bergen, and in the local museum it very much). Things in Bergen - excellent, but small, plohooborudovanny museum, not very good lighting - and quite another impression.
Another thing, if we take any of average artist, that no matter how tuzhsya - above its level does not rise. Although, if you look at recent auctions of contemporary art sale, then mused, is it? Artists are mediocre, and the prices are flying up - means that everything is decided by supply?: Confused:



qwerty вне форума   Ответить с цитированием
Этот пользователь сказал Спасибо qwerty за это полезное сообщение:
Ninni (04.12.2008)
 
Loading...