ARTICLE FOUND AT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/03/arts/design/03dali.html?pagewanted=1&ref=design
The article I read was from The New York Times website and it was about Dali and his later work. The article made an interesting statement about Dali and the comparison between his early work and his later work. The article explored the statement that is widely shared among the art world: that Dali's earlier work was a great deal better and included more genius than his later work. It stated that the comparison between his later and earlier work was like comparing apples and oranges. The High Museum of Art in Atlanta has an exibition up of Dali's later work in order to try to show that although different, his later work is still entirely creative, interesting and worth while to look at.
I would have to agree with the article although over time artists and lose their initial creative genius in their work in order to please a higher instituion set in place by society such as fame, money, or the media I still think their talent is what got them there in the first place. He has impecable technique and skill in his work and that shows through in his later work as well. His work is interesting and often times has so many components to explore. If I was in Atlanta I would go to this exhibition.
Interesting article choice. Although I have seen an exhibition of Dali's work, it never occurred to me that the older paintings were any better than the more recent ones. In fact, I don't think that they are, really. Which, while I am only one person, does say a lot about this article's critical interpretation of Salvador Dali. Art means different things to different audiences, and while I am certainly not an art critic, I am an appreciator of art--something that is equally as important. I agree with you in the sense that Dali is an impeccable visual artist, and while I understand the perspective from which these opinions are given, I think they are, as any perspective, subjective.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I am a big Dali fan, he certainly was rather hit or miss throughout his career. Some of his paintings are mind blowing, while others hardly stir up anything within me. This article is a perfect illustration of the way art can and will affect each person differently. Dali was a very strange individual, but his talent cannot be ignored. As far as "selling out" is concerned, I like to think artists do not change themselves for the sake of fame, but sometimes it cannot be refuted. However, people often see an artist changing their style and assume they've strayed from their roots. Personally, I believe people are very dynamic and change over time, and that the "sell out" argument is between an artist and his craft.
ReplyDeleteI would have to agree that this article was most likely subjective. I do agree with you that he was an incredibly talented artist though. When people see change, some take it in positives way and others, of course, take it the completely different direction. Art is meant to be interpreted, whether it is interpreted the way the artist (in this case, Dali) wanted it to be or not. I'm a huge Dali fan, so it's difficult to see where the author of the article if coming from, but his or her opinion is interesting nonetheless.
ReplyDelete