New member
Came across this on another forum, I wonder if the same applies to some of the more avant garde practicing in other disciplines?

"In art ... those who are refined, rich, unoccupied, who are distillers of quintessence, seek what is new, strange, original, extravagant, scandalous. I, myself, since Cubism and before, have satisfied these masters and critics with all the changing oddities which passed through my head, and the less they understood me, the more they admired me. By amusing myself with all these games, with all these absurdities, puzzles, rebuses, arabesques, I became famous, and that very quickly. And fame, for a painter, means sales, gains, fortune, riches. And today, as you know, I am celebrated. I am rich.
But when I am alone with myself, I have not the courage to think of myself as an artist in the great and ancient sense of the term. Giotto, Titian, Rembrandt, were great painters. I am only a public entertainer who has understood his times and exploited as best he could the imbecility, the vanity, the cupidity of his contemporaries.
Mine is a bitter confession, more painful than it may appear, but it has the merit of being sincere."
Pablo Picasso 1952

I can think of a few that should fit the bill!

John Watt

This is what I've been saying for a long time.
With the inventions of the oil paints that the "Expressionists" used,
Renoir, Matisse, Van Gogh, Degas, Monet, Manet, Lautrec, and so many others,
they were ignored by the art world and new media,
because everyone else was getting into their own cameras, or having a photo taken.
These Expressionists were trying to create a new art form as losing traditional portraiture.
When Pablo Picasso came along, like he says, just trying to be different,
the art and media world jumped all over him as a living expressionist.
The one thing Pablo Picasso failed to mention is why he did it, being a sex addict.
That also fit in with the art deco generation, coke being the new illegal drug,
after being legal in the States from the start.
For all that Picasso signed as his artwork, when it wasn't, mass manufactured,
he never painted on one of the wine bottles he drank from.
Over ten years ago, The Antiques Roadshow was saying that 4 to $5,000 drawings,
signed by Picasso, could now only be appraised as if they were a postcard souvenir.
And the worst thing about seeing him in all those photos, sitting back in short short pants,
with no shirt on, and his wife or lover bending over him, was he just wasn't good looking.
So I don't blame him for not doing any good self-portraits, as blown as his blew period got.

If anyone wants to invest in the next step of "Nude Woman Descending Stairs",
sign up for some pixellent pixels of nude pixies steppin'down some powder,
to put your artistic mind up in the cloud.
Last edited: