Hannah Gadsby’s Picasso Show Was Meant to Ignite Debate. And It Did.

Ah, so it isn't a debate about ART, but rather your dislike of what she says. Got it.

That's cool. Everyone has different tastes.

Next to the etching on paper “Sculptor and Model Looking at Herself, 1933,” the comic writes: “Alternative title: ‘If I angle the mirror to reflect the sun, I can burn your face off. Look at my penis.’”
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/09/arts/design/hannah-gadsby-picasso-brooklyn-museum-debate.html

A stupid and juvenile comment by Gadsby.
 
You did not get it. It is a debate about art and her comments.

Her comments are both a critique of the man but more importantly a critique of the art as an outgrowth of the man who made it.

She, herself, is an artist. She is doing what the modern artists like Picasso did: upsetting the apple cart of the old art. This is iconoclasm.
 
Next to the etching on paper “Sculptor and Model Looking at Herself, 1933,” the comic writes: “Alternative title: ‘If I angle the mirror to reflect the sun, I can burn your face off. Look at my penis.’”
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/09/arts/design/hannah-gadsby-picasso-brooklyn-museum-debate.html

A stupid and juvenile comment by Gadsby.

You call it stupid and juvenile, I call it clever commentary. Her artform is social commentary in the form of humor. She is doing what artists like Picasso did: she is taking the old forms and breaking them up. Reconfiguring them. Showing a different view.

She is entitled to make her own art. You don't have to like it. It isn't your taste. You prefer the old stuff. Just as those who hated Cubism did.
 
Her comments are both a critique of the man but more importantly a critique of the art as an outgrowth of the man who made it.

She, herself, is an artist. She is doing what the modern artists like Picasso did: upsetting the apple cart of the old art. This is iconoclasm.

She, Gadsby, is a comedian. Her comment was incredibly stupid and childish.
 
She, Gadsby, is a comedian. Her comment was incredibly stupid and childish.

Clearly you dislike her artform. She is taking a page out of art history. She is challenging the art you love and using it to make art of her own. You love the old stuff, she is making new stuff. Just as Picasso's art was attacked by his critics in the early 20th century as being from "diseased nerves" and "degenerate". (See HERE)

So, it's OK if you dislike her art. You are not alone in the history of art.
 
Clearly you dislike her artform. She is taking a page out of art history. She is challenging the art you love and using it to make art of her own. You love the old stuff, she is making new stuff. Just as Picasso's art was attacked by his critics in the early 20th century as being from "diseased nerves" and "degenerate". (See HERE)

So, it's OK if you dislike her art. You are not alone in the history of art.

Her artform is comedy. I kind of lost your point.
 
Clearly you dislike her artform. She is taking a page out of art history. She is challenging the art you love and using it to make art of her own. You love the old stuff, she is making new stuff. Just as Picasso's art was attacked by his critics in the early 20th century as being from "diseased nerves" and "degenerate". (See HERE)

So, it's OK if you dislike her art. You are not alone in the history of art.

Hard to understand your comments. You seem to know nothing about Gadsby or Picasso.

I never said she has no right to comment. I said her comments are inane and childish.
 
Her artform is comedy. I kind of lost your point.

She is an artist. She is breaking the old art to make new art. You don't like it. Clearly. You use much of the same language that was used about Picasso when he first drifted over into Cubism.

You are continuing a tradition of disliking new art in preference the old art you are familiar with and which you love.

EVERYONE does that.
 
She is an artist. She is breaking the old art to make new art. You don't like it. Clearly. You use much of the same language that was used about Picasso when he first drifted over into Cubism.

You are continuing a tradition of disliking new art in preference the old art you are familiar with and which you love.

EVERYONE does that.

I never heard of anyone calling a comedian an artist. Fine if you want to do that, but it is eccentric.
 
You don't need to insult me.

Gadsby’s quotes, which are printed above more serious art historical musings, are larded with the language of Twitter. “Weird flex,” reads one appended to a Picasso print of a nude woman caressing a sculpture of a naked, chiseled man. “Don’t you hate it when you look like you belong in a Dickens novel but end up in a mosh pit at Burning Man? #MeToo,”
https://www.artnews.com/art-news/re...ablo-matic-brooklyn-museum-review-1234670115/

Silly comments by Gadsby.
 
Well, you keep ignoring actual quotes of Gadsby and refuse to discuss the exhibit.

No, I'm not, actually. I am aware of what she says. You don't like it. I find it funny. That's how art is supposed to work. You don't think comedy is an art form, clearly you wouldn't think drama is an art form either by that reasoning. We disagree.

That's how art works. Not everyone likes all art. It is purely taste.

You defend Picasso against those who disassemble him and make different art from the pieces. Just as modern art disassembles more representational forms and makes different art.

You speak in exactly the same tones as those who hated on Picasso when he expanded his art.
 
“Humans are not doing great,” they say on the audio guide. “We are unsettled. I blame Picasso. That’s a little joke. Or is it? I don’t know.”
https://www.artnews.com/art-news/re...ablo-matic-brooklyn-museum-review-1234670115/

What the hell is that supposed to mean?!

What the hell does this mean?

restricted


(BTW, so you don't need to insult me anymore, this is a Pollock, not a Picasso. But you should get the point)
 
Back
Top