Glamor in the art

[Veronic]

Сообщение от Ninni

Dear Veronique, that "sexuality" or rather vulgar women in his paintings - is identical with the full vulgarity of his "art". -I would call his "risovalchestvo" - Sex and the City, even umudrivshisby this insult eponymous film.

Pile of tanned bodies, compositional absurdity, stupidity and complete lack of portraits of ideas .....

- He generally knows what is painting? It is doubtful that his subconscious has ever come into contact with this concept ....

- He is not revealing - he advocates, indulges, promotes and operates - business and nothing personal. "



Art humbly incitement of the masses?

No, art should reach the masses and the masses should be drawn to the arts.

I have not found a link on the article but I asked your opinion and obviously you gave it to me strange, not quite adequate words.

"If the routine dissection scalpel Rogers in the middle was not very socially accepted, then in the last few years, the artist's works are best described by the phrase" hit the top ten. "Solo exhibitions around the world only confirm this. Artworks Rogers acquired by large American museums."
This quote