Has anyone else received the images of William's self portraits? I admit that I was a bit surprised to find them so different from the abstract paintings I've seen at his exhibits.
They not only look like William, but they feel like his personality - or actually, two sides of his personality since the drawing and the painting feel quite different. I could never mistake either one for a weasel or a whale, and do happily declare "Ah, that is he" in expressing that pleasure which Aristotle says comes from mimesis: "the most beautiful colors laid on confusedly will not give as much pleasure as the chalk outline of a portrait" But how does this jibe with William's pursuit of the meaningless? Are these paintings somehow less art-worthy because they seem more meaningful than his abstract works? Is that why they were not included in his career retrospective at the Cultural Center earlier this year? BTW - for what it's worth-- since I am not shy about expressing my aesthetic response -- I think that drawing is among the best I've seen - and not just among our contemporaries. It's got real power - and well expresses that noble seriousness of artistic purpose of which he often speaks. And.... I'm quite sure that Ayn Rand would have liked it , too. ____________________________________________________________ Diet Help Cheap Diet Help Tips. Click here. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/c?cp=GBE0oedO1iK5q4s-RAu5zQAAJz6c l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYQAAAAAA=
