Somewhere among these comments I pointed out the prudence of knowing what one was talking about when judging the work of an artist whose status is so highly regarded by so many careful scholars, critics and others, that there are few peers to equal him or her. That should settle the conversation and underscore the foolishness of seat-of-the-pants judgments by those who are unqualified to make distinctive and persuasive art judgments --- which is different from the quality or worth of a personal experience of the work. Cheerskep is jumping well beyond his arena of expertise when he implies that I have a "defective sensibility". That's just another of his crotchety and spiteful remarks when it's abundantly clear to anyone who cares to look at the record online or in a library, etc., that my sensibility is intact and shining brilliantly. I never said that some people are beyond reproach or free from error but I did say, or tried to say, that none of us here, and few elsewhere, are equipped to decide the merits or faults of Titian's works, except to project our own shortcomings. Besides, I love Titian like a father.
Delacroix rightly criticized those artists whose weak ambitions where such that "...they would not dare to be Rubens". I criticize those who, ill-prepared, dare to judge Titian. The actor Vincent Price, in his late career, decided to become an art critic. He wrote for newspapers and magazine and received much praise for his pithy remarks. Too bad that they were among the dumbest comments ever put in print. His capstone all-time dumb comment was the time he reviewed a group of Pre-Raphaelite painters and concluded with the comment that he couldn't understand why they were called Pre-Raphaelites when they came 400 years after Raphael. Some people should stick to B movies and similar pop mush. WC ________________________________ From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, April 4, 2009 9:03:34 AM Subject: Re: Judging the late Titian In a message dated 4/3/09 8:23:38 PM, [email protected] writes: > And huzzah on your arrogant artist's defense of Titian, even those bad > late ones. <g> > > Michael, you often bring a rewarding, arch, irony to your lines. Occasionally this undermines surety about what your own position is, but that can be okay. For example, it's unsure if you are praising or ridiculing William here. I don't agree with William when he chastises Mando for daring to deride any work of Titian's -- as you also dae to do by insinuating Titian had bad late paintings. As Horace said, "Sometimes even noble Homer nods." I have frequent dinners with a friend who is a Shakespeare scholar. The admiration we feel for W.S. is such that sometimes all we can do is shake our heads in loving awe. But we would never think of defending his every line. In truth, I think that to condemn any criticism whatever of W.S. -- or Titian -- would be to display a defective sensibility. But I grant I can't be sure William was being serious when he rounded on Mando... ************** Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a recession. (http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare00000003 )
