A good artist - a successful artist?

[Vlasta]

Сообщение от Ninni

A lot of thinking and rammed by a lady - in fact could not be a serious artist.

Interesting idea. This, I think, a separate issue. You would not want her to develop the forum is not within this theme?

[Veronic]

Note from Ninni
Much rammed thinking and lady - in fact could not be a serious artist.

Сообщение от Vlasta

Interesting idea. This, I think, a separate issue. You would not want her to develop the forum is not within this theme?

Here on
painter Elisabeth Vigee-Lebrun

Favorite portrait painter of European nobility, a member of many art academies (including "free honorary associate of the Academy" St. Petersburg College), skillfully combining klassitsistskuyu sentimental idealization of sensitivity, "the poetry of the heart, softening even the most ceremonial of her images. Among the characteristic of things - Artist Robert G. (1788, Louvre, Paris), G. Stroganov (1793), Stroganov and his son (1793), Empress Elizabeth Alekseevna (1795), daughter of Paul I, the great princess Alexandra Pavlovna, and Elena P. (1796), Empress Maria Feodorovna (1799, all portraits - the Hermitage, St. Petersburg), Madame de Stael (1808-1809, Museum of Art and History, Geneva). I left several notable self-portraits (Self-portrait with her daughter, 1787, the Louvre, Self-Portrait of the artist, who writes the Empress Elizabeth Alekseevnu, 1800, Hermitage). Has to landscape.

In the picture a portrait of Marie Antoinette brush Elisabeth Vigee-Lebrun

[Vlasta]

Veronic, class! I looked up - she's still beautiful, and it was, and if the artist, and clever. I spent almost 90 years. A remarkable woman! This can only admire.

[наследник]

If it is permissible to remark on the main theme ...: shy:

... It's not a legend, when Pushkin exclaimed - "Ah yes, Pushkin, ah yes son of a bitch!"

For example, I think that he talked with God.

And born artists - a painter, actor, writer, poet, architect ... seek to do - to report to God about yourself
in a moment lit up their previously elusive harmony .

  And can only speak through what they have for themselves got.
It depends not only the level of genius, but talent, to whom something is given.

It is only then people will evaluate ... And how - we know.

[K-Maler]

Сообщение от DSF

absolutely agree with you, but I do not asserted. I just wanted to say that the commercial success or failure should be treated calmly and not do the tragedy of what you paid 10 000 USD, not $ 10 000

The issue consists of two parts: how much is "a living basket artist" and how his life to understand the artist himself. In the old days was taken for granted that the artist belongs to the same social class (upper) and that the recipients of his art and his work paid accordingly. Then everything changed, only the artist's needs remain the same, ie need to maintain itself at the proper level, not to be declassed. Well, careerists and bad guys no one has canceled ... There is a very ambitious people. It is strange that while discussion and promotion of the artist "and claims against the artists, who want part of the pie, they are not servants, and with an outstretched hand, like, should not stand ...

[Veronic]

Сообщение от K-Maler

It is strange that while discussion and promotion of the artist "and claims against the artists, who want part of the pie, they are not servants, and with an outstretched hand, like, should not be ...

All very complicated in our kingdom.
On the one hand there is public opinion (which, incidentally davleet over most minds as the general public and the small circle of collectors and dealers) that an artist should be poor in any case should not sell his paintings, but only keep them for the museum, well the very rare cases, it should give them. Then this artist considered to be a genius, even for life.
On the other hand history has many examples, that the artist has in life can be rich.
These two views can not both fit in the head, so there is a contradiction, and I think that it will long continue to cause controversy.
Therefore, let each artist decides for himself that he was closer, and choosing .... not suffering from pangs of conscience (if successful), and from hunger and poverty (with oblivion).

By the way, very often still happens that the tragic fate of the artist gives a great excuse to gather the fruit sellers to follow his paintings. So it's not for nothing that artists humiliated, there is a subtle meaning.

[DSF]

And I think - there is no contradiction ... As the poet said: "Being a sensible man could even think about the beauty of nails, for which in vain to argue with the century?" The main thing in this business - talent. If it is, money does not spoil the artist, but only give him new opportunities for implementation. But talent is realized in any case, he will find the necessary funds. Remember the fate Pirosmani.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от DSF

Remember the fate of Pirosmani.

But fate intervened in his brothers Zdaneviches and Le Dante. They had begun to "untwist". If not, they would know we are Pirosmani?

[Art-lover]

Сообщение от DSF

But the talent is realized in any case, he will find the necessary funds

Unfortunately, this is not so. We learn we only realized and promoted the talents and not on unrealized or unrecognized easier for us to think that they are not. About gifts slishom angular and irregular to fit into the vulgar reality Local hud.protsessov, as too vulnerable, to wade to fame through a dense crowd of mediocrities fussy about too proud to endure the insolence "grand" art world, accustomed to the humble artists about too talented to find understanding of the crowd - and because sitting without grub, no paint and tools ... - These easier for us not to think.
You say it is too pretentious and sentimental picture? No, this is today's reality, I know these stories himself. And burn the manuscript, and the masterpieces are sold for pennies on the street at random passers-by, if only the artist did not die of starvation.
Talented people are very different in nature, and destiny because they are different. Sociability, major, adaptability, a thirst for fame and money, limited, self-confidence - these are qualities greatly contributed to the success of talent during his lifetime.
Never superfluous to the artist's basic working conditions and the availability of subsistence.
A surplus of talent often prevents success. We can say, the talent - happiness, genius - punishment.

[DSF]

When I say that "talent is realized," I do not mean the "promotion", "understanding of the crowd", "prodiranie to fame" and various other attributes of "success" or "failed". I want to say that if a person has a talent of the artist, given to him over, he will paint or draw, using any opportunity (if it is, of course, not killed). And what is the fate of his works - this is a question entirely different. "Zdaneviches" there sooner or later, even a hundred years, would be a good picture. But even if all the artist's work will be lost if we can say that he did not realize? He is committed, all that should be.