Salyavin, That's a nice painting there which I've seen somewhere before. I'd have to check his jyotish chart to find out why he became insane and what are the planetary combinations that gave him the talent for painting. In general, talent in art is a manifestation of passion for work and living.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : The fact he had mental problems didn't detract from or affect his painting. He had mastered most aspects of art before he adopted the life of a penniless traveller. I went to the major retrospective of his work at the Royal Academy in London recently, everything from his sketches to his last works was represented alongside his letters to his brother which gave explanations for how he saw the world and what his paintings were trying to achieve. The last ones before he shot himself are heartbreaking, as are his last paintings, all of decripit figures toiling the land in autumn. Beautiful stuff, but he saw that season as mirroring that time of life before we ourselves get cut down by nature's scythe. There were paintings there I'd never seen before including the ones he did during his last stay at the asylum. It was groundbreaking stuff looking at the world like that and he was the first to do portraits of the peasants and champion their lives as being close to God through virtue of their poverty and lack of pretension. He became a priests for a while and gave all his money away because he thought it was a barrier to spiritual growth. So you are right in that he'd be surprised at what his paintings sell for now. And who's buying them. He hated the bourgeoisie! My favourite painting of his in New York, I've yet to see it. I love how the village sleeps unaware of the whirling majesty of the sky. A man after my own heart was Vincent, he saw the world so vibrantly and clearly. Felt it's pain and injustice. I was in tears at the end. Proper good art show that was. That's enough rambling from me, I'm going out for a pint. http://www.vangoghgallery.com/painting/starry-night.html ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote : Judy, I'm still puzzled at how these art critics can proclaim the works of Van Gogh to be artistic genius. From what I understand, when he painted his self-portrait, he was already insane. And, if he were alive today, he'd be astonished that his paintings are now valued in millions of dollars. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <authfriend@...> wrote : I seriously doubt he'll sell them (he might give away a few to friends). The best of them will probably end up in his presidential library for the public to see. In any case, if art collectors were to get hold of them, they'd be valued only as curiosities. They're hardly works of artistic genius. Salyavin, It all depends if he can sell these artworks for millions during his lifetime, and if the art collectors in the future would value them like those of Van Gough and Monet. But I would have to give him credit for expanding his creative talents after leading the US into expensive war campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote : George W. Bush has recently displayed his works of art, as shown in the link below. What do you think? He's a better artist than he was a president. http://news.yahoo.com/photos/portraits-by-george-w-bush-slideshow/ http://news.yahoo.com/photos/portraits-by-george-w-bush-slideshow/
