[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от zarajara; 1719513"

"Grand Master", "a major figure in the art" and "an artist that I like" - not always the same. Objectivity in assessments is not possible, but it should at least try.

Come on you ... >
Participant - an amateur artist, amateur can understand, for him, as for pervokurstnika huduchilischa, riding skills achievements are to draw the grass green and sky blue, "as live". The level of understanding of art of Nikita Khrushchev: "Look better, what a self-portrait painted Laktionov. If you take the cardboard, cut a hole in it and make a portrait Laktionova what you see? Looks like a person. And the same hole to attach to your portrait, which will ? Women have to forgive me - ass. "
This and this

Сообщение от Guriev, Igor; 1719451"

Brodsky Laktionov much better.

 >
And these passages are clear:

Сообщение от Guriev, Igor; 1719451"

sad example, and attempts to crash some L. Freud to start painting again confirms it.

Participant in their understanding of contemporary art (and there "modern" art, postwar) referred to "surovostilnikah", after visiting four exhibitions of these authors. There's only top - Viktor Ivanov, Popkov, Obrosov and Ossowski, alas. With more advanced sokurstniki-Muscovites have explained to those exhibitions boy near as they could, then "otpechatolos" for life. Next - no, no, a kind of "complex Shukshin," but in iso.

Сообщение от zarajara; 1719513"

The right of the artist (as nehudozhnika) to speak about any works it is not disputed, but not in "dead artist."

 And this is such a chic "à la postmodernizm": potsinichnie, poepatazhnie. >
"Do you like Lucien Freud? And I say that it is complete shit, and do not talk to me of Modigliani and Chagall. This is - not painters, but among the Jews and not artists. And the sad example of a disaster-attempts of some L. Freud's start painting again confirms this. What? world admires? World - lamb, I, I, I" and only [SIZE=4"]I[/SIZE] understand the art! Laktionov - genius, Bakst - could not draw! "
 > > >