Why and how a good artist, I think bad Renoir said: "We are not critics, not to Marchand and not even for the fans in general, and for half a dozen artists, who appreciate our efforts, because they write themselves ... make as to Monsieur Choquet, Ghanian, and for an unknown passer-by who stopped by the display of the trader and experienced a momentary pleasure from the fact that looking at one of our pictures! ". But Degas - at the recognition: "These people want to convince me that I have achieved recognition. To achieve, what does that mean?" We always achieve and never achieve. What is to achieve recognition? Be on one wall with the "Lady of" Bouguereau and Slave Market "Giraud, Toto?" I do not want. Each goes his own way and has a small circle of public, and officials here have nothing to do ... I'm paying the taxes. What do they care of my paintings? "Oh no!" They want to interfere in everything. .. Art for them - a chessboard, and we, the artists - figure. They put forward a pawn, then another, etc. But I'm not a pawn, and I do not want to get me promoted.
I think that an artist who wants to keep at least some trace in the history of art must first of all think about art, and then about money, fame, popularity, etc. There will be an opportunity to earn - well, no - nothing too terrible. "Paintings willing to write at least backwards" - said in the old Ingres.
|