London

APOSTROPHE THIS YA CUNT! wrote:Pre raphaelite?

Aye, he was a painter before signing for Man U

test wrote:James, have you not got a favourite tree you could write about, you arboreal, highland rogue?

Here it is, no need to thank me crown

As in " i'm away fur a pre-raphaelite".

APOSTROPHE THIS YA CUNT! wrote:As in " i'm away fur a pre-raphaelite".

you're a mucky bugger

Be fair James, it has taken him almost to the end of page two for him to make a knob gag, that shows tremendous restraint on sev’s behalf.

Gladstone wrote:

Liverpool, and all the others including SuperLeeds are fantastic cities. But as you mention the Walker in Liverpool:



The Witch of Larbert
Painting by John Millais
'The Martyr of the Solway'
1871
Oil on canvas
60.3 x 56.5 cm (27 3/4 x 22 1/4 in)
Walker Art Gallery, Merseyside

and see: http://larbertviews.net23.net/index_files/Page552.htm

(test, I've been out filming, so 'soon' I'll have a sample..... )

Took me years to appreciate Leeds, Glad, very fond of it now though. Not fond of those cunts at the Henry Moore Institute mind.

That’s a terrible painting, it should be destroyed.

{font only Glad can see}Will it be as “soon” as the interview with James? Really looking forward to what you come up with, Glad.{/ font only Glad can see}

test wrote:Be fair James, it has taken him almost to the end of page two for him to make a knob gag, that shows tremendous restraint on sev’s behalf.

Your recent lack of smileys are worrying me

And whats so "terrible" about that painting, i personally think it's beautiful.

APOSTROPHE THIS YA CUNT! wrote:And whats so "terrible" about that painting, i personally think it's beautiful.

crowns not an oil on canvas type, he likes sculpture and architecture. I'd hazard a guess he thinks that paintings shite

I do too, but not to the detriment of that gorgeous picture, imagine having the skill to be able to do that?

APOSTROPHE THIS YA CUNT! wrote:

test wrote:Be fair James, it has taken him almost to the end of page two for him to make a knob gag, that shows tremendous restraint on sev’s behalf.

Your recent lack of smileys are worrying me

If I start smiling in real life, I’ll start using smileys on here, sev. It’s no secret I’m unhappy and find no joy in living.

APOSTROPHE THIS YA CUNT! wrote:And whats so "terrible" about that painting, i personally think it's beautiful.

It’s chocolate box art. It lacks imagination, ambition and challenge. Art’s like porn, the more you see the more you yearn for something new and different.
 
James is correct (and an utter gent) sculpture is my main interest. The WBCP said to me years ago that sculpture is where it’s at. She was right, she’s always fucking right, except when she tries to make me sleep with her friends, that’s very wrong.
 
I’ve fallen for a couple of paintings by JD Fergusson, not down to their artistic merit but because they’re as sexy as fuck. The first is “Torso of A Woman” and you can see it at Kelvingrove:




The second is “Blue Beads”, at Tate Britain, which reminds me of “fat Sue”, who I’ve never found sexy in real life:

Ah widny gie it hoose room.

Good tale attached to it tho.

(And a v interesting blog/site an'all)

Does that impinge?

Or is it all aesthetics?

Or Bollocks?

Press your buttons and gamble away...

What do you know? You can't even play simple pop songs.

How dare you.

My Ob-la-di-bla-dah was the talk of the Tesco cafeteria in Camelon as recently as last week!




My case comes up a week next Wednesday.



I've asked for six previous offences to be taken into consideration.

I've a folder full of your offences on my hard drive, young man. Actually it's full of your genius. Fuck, why can't I abuse you so I can get back in uncle mo's good books again, he's my hero you know? Even if he is almost as unreliable as you.

He's a journalist... notoriously unreliable... ask Charlotte.

I heard he was at a sports-related presser earlier this week.

The filthy, filthy beast.


Filthy Beast

test wrote:

APOSTROPHE THIS YA CUNT! wrote:And whats so "terrible" about that painting, i personally think it's beautiful.

It’s chocolate box art. It lacks imagination, ambition and challenge. Art’s like porn, the more you see the more you yearn for something new and different.
 
James is correct (and an utter gent) sculpture is my main interest. The WBCP said to me years ago that sculpture is where it’s at. She was right, she’s always fucking right, except when she tries to make me sleep with her friends, that’s very wrong.
 
I’ve fallen for a couple of paintings by JD Fergusson, not down to their artistic merit but because they’re as sexy as fuck. The first is “Torso of A Woman” and you can see it at Kelvingrove:




The second is “Blue Beads”, at Tate Britain, which reminds me of “fat Sue”, who I’ve never found sexy in real life:

The worlds a critic eh? Look , obviously you've forgotten more about art than i could ever hope to learn, but that summing oup of the witches picture is pretty one eyed, has it always been chocolate box? Has it always been unambitious? Has it always been unchallenging? Has it always been unimaginative? If not why has it become so? And if it happens to all pictures like those fantastic pair( no pun intended) you posted, whats to ecome of them? Does the same happen with sculptures? If so where does it end? Will it go full circle? Why is there such snobbery and eliteism connected with this stuff? In my opinion, it all boils down to one thing, personal choice. As an aside, did you watch the programme about the RA summer exhibitions last night? Fantastic stuff...........again in my personal opinion.

Immo wrote:He's a journalist... notoriously unreliable... ask Charlotte.

I heard he was at a sports-related presser earlier this week.

The filthy, filthy beast.


Filthy Beast

Tarquin's not going to be happy you mentioned Charlotte, there may be reprisals.

APOSTROPHE THIS YA CUNT! wrote:

test wrote:

APOSTROPHE THIS YA CUNT! wrote:And whats so "terrible" about that painting, i personally think it's beautiful.

It’s chocolate box art. It lacks imagination, ambition and challenge. Art’s like porn, the more you see the more you yearn for something new and different.
 
James is correct (and an utter gent) sculpture is my main interest. The WBCP said to me years ago that sculpture is where it’s at. She was right, she’s always fucking right, except when she tries to make me sleep with her friends, that’s very wrong.
 
I’ve fallen for a couple of paintings by JD Fergusson, not down to their artistic merit but because they’re as sexy as fuck. The first is “Torso of A Woman” and you can see it at Kelvingrove:




The second is “Blue Beads”, at Tate Britain, which reminds me of “fat Sue”, who I’ve never found sexy in real life:

The worlds a critic eh? Look , obviously you've forgotten more about art than i could ever hope to learn, but that summing oup of the witches picture is pretty one eyed, has it always been chocolate box? Has it always been unambitious? Has it always been unchallenging? Has it always been unimaginative? If not why has it become so? And if it happens to all pictures like those fantastic pair( no pun intended) you posted, whats to ecome of them? Does the same happen with sculptures? If so where does it end? Will it go full circle? Why is there such snobbery and eliteism  connected with this stuff? In my opinion, it all boils down to one thing, personal choice. As an aside, did you watch the programme about the RA summer exhibitions last night? Fantastic stuff...........again in my personal opinion.

Get in there Sev!! 

Lovin this Brian Sewell on steroids stuff.

Stands to reason it must have appeared 'challenging' at one point given the fact that she had to have her 'Norma Snockers' covered to protect the Victorian sensibilities....

http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/online/exhibitions/faith/martyrofsolway.asp

(With thanks to Gladders )

Give the perfumed ponce a seeing to.

APOSTROPHE THIS YA CUNT! wrote:








The worlds a critic eh? Look , obviously you've forgotten more about art than i could ever hope to learn, but that summing oup of the witches picture is pretty one eyed, has it always been chocolate box? Has it always been unambitious? Has it always been unchallenging? Has it always been unimaginative? If not why has it become so? And if it happens to all pictures like those fantastic pair( no pun intended) you posted, whats to ecome of them? Does the same happen with sculptures? If so where does it end? Will it go full circle? Why is there such snobbery and eliteism  connected with this stuff? In my opinion, it all boils down to one thing, personal choice. As an aside, did you watch the programme about the RA summer exhibitions last night? Fantastic stuff...........again in my personal opinion.

I know nothing about art, sev, I just attend lots of exhibitions.

All representational art is shit and lacks imagination. Copying something is a skill, not an art. Editing a video at the moment, will try and address your other points in a bit.

If you know nothing like i do ( or dont ) how come you can keep coming awzy with little soundbites(?) about what art is and what it should be? You keep saying the right things to befuddle me which leads me to believe you do know about it but i still maintain its all a personal choice, you probably would get a chubby over a statue thats had sperm, menstrual blood and faeces mixed in with the bronze, i wouldnt cos i dont get it, i hate yon cunt damo hirst, but love banksy(sp) personal choice.

Has it always been chocolate box? To me yes, but then I have the benefit of hindsight. I’m sure impressionism was seen as avant garde at the time, but it’s an awful movement, impressionist fans have no class, if you like impressionism in this age there’s no hope for you. Now cubism and dada, to pick two random movements, are still relevant today, so no, time doesn’t make all artistic styles irrelevant.
 
Sculpture is subject to the same rules as painting.
 
Will it go full circle? No, art is evolutionary not cyclical. Well, good art is.
 
Why is there such snobbery and elitism connected with this stuff? Fear. The emperor’s new clothes. A host of things. Why do some people like Pulp and others like Coldplay? Everyone’s different and should never fear ridicule for voicing their opinions.
Attended the RA Summer Exhibition in 2011, it was terrible. Art crammed into every space, it was impossible to appreciate it. It did introduce me to Anselm Kiefer though, his work is well worth discovering. To match your aside, I walked past the RA last week and snorted with derision at the tourists entering. Elitism you see.
 
Sorry, sev, all my comments come with the tacit “in my opinion”, many apologies, I should have stated that.
 
Again, apologies, I’m not trying to befuddle you, sev, I love reading your opinions.
 
If you “don’t get it”, don’t worry about it, there are plenty of charlatans about, Damien Hirst being one of them. Most of his work is shit, but “Away from the Herd” absolves all his artistic sins.
 
If you have the slightest interest in art I urge you to watch Robert Hughes’ – “The Shock Of the New”. It’s the most important series on art made. Hughes is god and his casual arrogance is to die for:
 
https://www.youtube.com/user/MrShockofthenew?feature=watch