So does the modern artist to be able to draw?

[Wladzislaw]

Сообщение от Allena

At the same time, knowledge of languages, music, the foundations of drawing was not an exceptional phenomenon. No capitation, yes - but not unusual.

Here a question arises about the term "ordinary". Rather, there is still no than yes. During the late Soviet Union the opportunity, accessibility, and was usually an order of magnitude higher than during the late RI. But we live in a time not far from the SSSRa and we can say that all this is not especially particular impact on the masses. And the past have almost always positive, less knowledge, lack of its own negative experience, poor is forgotten, bright and positive prevails ...

[Posav]

Сообщение от Allena

At the same time, knowledge of languages, music, the foundations of drawing was not an exceptional phenomenon. No capitation, yes - but quite normal. It was part of home education, and of course, such knowledge possible tried to give to children.

And I thought that the children of nobles interacted only with their parents and teachers. No it is now the pernicious influence of the street, bad friends, computer games, shooters ubivalok, bad movies and Illustration by teleyaschiku. Must have been just gold kids grow up, though not socially adapted. Specifically not socially adapted to the "trash".

[Wladzislaw]

Сообщение от Cyril Syzransky

According to family reasons: either her own mother, or a hostel or institution. For example, the noble young ladies.

Private finishing school - very often it is only the sonorous name.

The Institute of Noble Ladies, if you do not confuse, do not take girls from birth vysluzhennogo nobility. And such was the whole Rossiyskuyu Empire about 10.

The higher women's courses and teachers' seminary - this is a practical limit of education. Signified for women in the RI was extremely low.

[Seriy]

funny to read about the Soviet Union, no one could speak a foreign language, even if you have 5 in the certificate. Is that dipvuzah or language. A gentlemen in the 19 century, a man spoke and wrote in French, or German, or English, to bear witness. They taught language media, the Empire was full of foreigners and Germans, and French. The border was opened, Gogol created a Ukraine without leaving Italy ... The usual case-study tour abroad. And in schools and even a dead language taught in Latin.

Picasso's still, IMHO, a specific drawer. Compared with the old masters-Leonardo, Durer, etc. - he draws, like a schoolboy on his desk. And, if the result so all vporyadke images is, concisely, clearly, intelligibly. Although again, his best figures - calculated, thought out, easy to them, only apparent, as in the painting-I mean dove of peace or a series of artist and model, where everything is as it were drawn in the same breath, one line in one touch.
In the ordinary sketches of all as ordinary people-pocherkano God forbid.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от Seriy

Although again, his best figures - calculated, thought out, easy to them only apparent

Yes, I looked at a portrait of Stravinsky. There on the paper from the eraser of a living have no place and not erased until the end of the pencil a lot. Seen as Picasso worked on a simple kind of pattern in one line and painfully, with sweat.

[spigo]

Сообщение от Semen Semenovich

So does the modern artist to be able to draw?

He thought over this nonsense, and decided: a modern-no, an artist, yes.

[uriart]

Let it sounds funny, but!
Nobody ever asks the question as to whether the cook know how to cook!
And so on. You can bring a lot of examples, whether the shoemaker to be able to make boots ...
And why suddenly asked about the artist?
So if he will not be able to draw, is it the artist?
And how many contemporary artists who can not draw, live and die in obscurity?
Recently revealed information about one artist. Because of his work, he began to make sandwiches! That is, folding and devoured canvases with paintings.
Since he was already old and keep all this scribbling now negde.I himself while he said that all that he has drawn no one is interested.

[Posav]

Do not! Theme topical.

[uriart]

And esche.Esli be in the 17 th century, posed a question that whether the modern artist to be able to draw.
It would be nonsense!
Then this question.
And why in the 21 st century modern artist should not be able to draw?

[Сергей Дородный]

This is what I think on this topic.
In a world dominated by postmodernism. His doctrine - the magnificent form in full (and necessarily) the absence of content. (In contrast, for example, modernism, where the required unity of form and content).
And the domination of post-modernism, not only in the art (such a popular "show" - there is much to look at, no food for thought), but in all areas zhisni.
  For example, the policy and the state .- Prime and skaters are candidates in the European Parliament, the prime minister and his wife, fashion model, "We would like the president of another color - about us and write nothing.

All - a complete circus.
And in the era of art requires a circus.
Glass inserts a glass artist Ilona Staller, his wife, former porn star, the former of Parliament of the Italian Parliament. (Or, among the former porn stars do not exist? In memory of something that is left).

And many artists (as well as politicians, doctors, traffic cops) - before the tragic choice - to do their work (painting), or try to cut the dough, pointing to a large number of monitors, as you tra ... eat your dog.

The first (drawing) - like the art is not engaged (canvas and paint have died).
Second (playing the fool with the dogs) - not like the artists. Social experimenters samorazrushiteli, nisprovergateli moral values - please. But not artists.

My answer is - the artist should be able to draw. Only now is not that person is considered to be an artist.