[Clayart] Pete Voulkus

Terrance Lazaroff via Clayart clayart at lists.clayartworld.com
Thu Feb 5 14:51:24 EST 2015


When I see this discussion I ask,  is it the art or the creator?

Picasso did great easel work when he was 16.   He then made a bunch of paintings as a joke, did a blue period, played with found objects.  He even played with the forms of clay.  In the end he got the reputation as a skirt chaser, and ended his career with the anus period.

His career reminds me of an art school cuiculum.

Was his work great, or was he interesting, or both?

Getting ready to go to Spain. The Sun awaits.




Sent from my iPad

> On Feb 5, 2015, at 9:29 AM, Deborah Thuman via Clayart <clayart at lists.clayartworld.com> wrote:
> 
> I'm trying to be open minded about his work. I'm not sure I'm succeeding. 
> 
> I dislike most of what Picasso did. But.... he make it okay to play with more than one art toy. He tried just about every art toy in the box. You never knew what he was going to do next. People ask me what my medium is. Bleah! Who wants to play with just one toy? 
> 
> I love Kandinsky's work. I saw a retrospective at the Guggenheim in SoHo, NY. I don't understand it... but I do feel it. Kandinsky's work was pretty radical at the time he painted it. 
> 
> Mark Rothko. My mother would hate his work. Then again, she prefers sofa art - something that matches the sofa and throw pillows. I've stood in front of his paintings in museums and very quietly said: What are you saying to me, Mark? I usually start to cry. I like his work, but I could never own any of it. Not because I can't afford it, and I can't, but because I don't want a constant reminder of depression. Living with the depression inside of me is about all the depression I can take. 
> 
> RC Gorman. There was a guy who made a ton of money selling the same painting over and over and over again. Put all his paintings side by side. They're all the same. Different colors, but all the same. My mother would love Gorman's work. It's sofa art. I can't see the attraction. 
> 
> Voulkus. I've looked at the images on google. Sculpture, ice buckets, early work that appears sort of functional. I don't like any of it. What was the big deal? The first to make a name making huge  pieces? The first to make a name making abstract (which to me just look smashed) pots? 
> 
> I wonder how many "first to make....." people remain famous after 100 years. I wonder how many "first to make....." get stuck in one spot. Picasso never got stuck in any spot. I still dislike his work. Van Gogh got stuck, but his work fascinates me. Chihully branched out all over the place and makes magnificent pieces. I don't like how he treats his employees. I'd love to own some of his work; but I know I'd never enjoy having it. I'd be too worried the cats would knock a piece over and it would break. 
> 
> I'd keep pondering, but I have to go and pick about 19 juries. Don't ask - it's too depressing to explain. Perhaps a Rothko for my office.......
> 
> 
> Deb Thuman
> http://debthuman.blog.com/
> http://www.etsy.com/shop/DebThuman
> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Deb-Thumans-Art-Page/167529715986
> I can honestly say that I was never affected by the question of the success of an undertaking. If I felt it was the right thing to do, I was for it regardless of the possible outcome.   Golda Meir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MAILMAN_MIMEDEFANG WRAP
> _______________________________________________
> Clayart mailing list
> Clayart at lists.clayartworld.com
> http://lists.clayartworld.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clayart
> 
> MAILMAN_MIMEDEFANG



More information about the Clayart mailing list