>That painting seems like an abandon painting that was never finished. I don't have this impression. Boris Shoshensky
---------- Original Message ---------- From: armando baeza <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: armando baeza <[email protected]> Subject: Re: manet Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 20:05:23 -0800 That painting seems like an abandon painting that was never finished. It looks like it started as still life painting of two tables with liquor and glass ware,great detail on the persimmons. Then he started to add the center figure which had too much detail for a still life quality, then started to add those two figures that would occupy the same standing area and never resolve it. The yellow stripe indicates something (?). I think the right hand on the woman on the right became the last straw, and he stopped. Today photo realism is the thing, though i dislike that it's sold as paintings. I don't think I could feel comfortable doing that. mando On Nov 1, 2009, at 8:19 AM, Chris Miller wrote: >> A painting is not a singularity - but an overlay of differing >> systems and > concerns ... the painting is only reducible to itself > - because that is where all the parts are assembled" (Saul) > > No argument from any of us about that. > > But you did begin your essay on Manet by unequivocally placing one > concern > above another: > > "Manet's last painting 'Bar at the Folies Berghres', which seems at > first > sight to be a reflective study of an observer of the main action, > turns out to > be a paean to visual space." > > Perhaps it was written too quickly. > > ____________________________________________________________ > Weight Loss Program > Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here! > http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/c?cp=DQbs_h3ReVE55uk28- > hxkAAAJz6c > l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEUgAAAA > A=
