Comments on MAN Is Right

Maybe something's wrong with me, but the canon of Abstract Painting seems more and more like a talentless joke these days. I guess it's good for funky wall decoration while people go to galleries and hang out.

The wikipedia entry for Louis has this to say - Louis destroyed many of his paintings between 1955 and 1957.

Probably a good choice.

Jonathan, good thing you didn't use your last name. If you had, you would be forever connected to that silly comment. The god of dumb luck smiled on you!
The review of this remarkable work should be read by the few non-Johathans out there.
The WA PO proves again that it is a much better paper than the NYT.
Ms. Graves you're A-OK!

Louis's paintings are really remarkable to behold. I went on a Napa winery tour some years back and the thing I remember most about it was the one painting of his that was on display in one of tasting rooms. My memory of its presence persists while those of the wine and landscapes are long forgotten.

Jen is more than A-OK. Most of her posts are headstrong and worthy of consideration. I'll ignore them from now on since I've been put in my place.
I do appreciate your painting analysis Mr. Hertzmann, 'remarkable', simple, to the point. My remark is that I'll leave it at that. Oh yes, color theory! Yes, vibrant! Bye.

I love him.

I thought art historians had established that these paintings were made by Clyfford Stills' dog.

wow. thank you for bringing this to my attention. i'll have to look into louis

"Clyfford Still was something of a maverick in the art world. In many cases, he disdained or was infuriated by anyone who tried to interpret his work, including art critics, art historians, patrons, and museum curators." :) :) :) :)

wow, thanks, i've just looked into still

Henri,

Much of his work is at the Albright-Knox Gallery in Buffalo. Their website might be worth a look.