Monday, November 30, 2009

Thinking about artists I like

I was looking through art links and found this:
If I had it my way, I'd educate students so that the list looked like this:
1. Replace Picasso with Duchamp
2. Vincent Van Gogh
3. Leonardo da Vinci
4. Henri Matisse
5. Claude Monet
6. Salvador Dali
7. Georgia O'Keeffe
8. Andy Warhol
9. Michelangelo
10. Replace Rembrandt with Helen Frankenthaler
11. Replace Alfred Stieglitz with Louise Bourgeois
12. Replace Peter Paul Rubens with Basquiat

13. Wassily Kandinsky
14. Replace Cezanne with Hiroshi Sugimoto
15. Replace Jackson Pollock with Cy Twombly

16. Joan Miro
17. Piet Mondrian
18. Rene Magritte
19. Replace Raphael with Mel Chin
20. Replace Renoir with Sigmar Polke
21. Goya
22. Edgar Degas
23. Albrecht Durer
24. Paul Klee
25. Marc Chagall
26. Replace Titian with Maurizio Cattelan
27. M.C. Escher
28. Edward Hopper
29. Frida Kahlo
30. Caravaggio

who would you replace?


ianswanson said...

I know Rauschenberg would be in there, as well as Kippenberger. One could definitely replace O'Keefe, and probably Warhol.

Ceedric said...

Ian, sounds like you've been reading Jerry Saltz piece, The Artist Who Did Everything

ianswanson said...

Nope, what's it about?

Ceedric said...

It's really similar to what you said, about who would replace who:

If Robert Rauschenberg was the American Picasso—constantly innovating and working, and also prone to churning out crud—Kippenberger is the German Rauschenberg.

For the past decade, the world has been dominated by a chilly mix of Warhol’s use of culture as material, Richter’s ideas about photographs and abstraction, and Richard Prince’s notions of appropriation. It’s an international style that too many people use to produce art that looks like other art. Kippenberger’s work is powerful enough to scatter that aesthetic weather system. It’s deeply imprinted with received theories about reproduction, popular culture, and photography, but it never feels like it comes out of a cookie cutter. He created his own theory and then blew it to bits. Skepticism was his weapon of aesthetic destruction.

Read more: Martin Kippenberger: The Problem Perspective -- New York Magazine Art Review

sounds close doesn't it?