The artist Pablo Picasso once said later in his life while observing an exhibit of children’s art, “When I was their age I could draw like Raphael. It took me a lifetime to learn to draw like they do.”
This is complete phony nonsense. This proves that Picasso should never be described as an ‘artist’ without the appropriate modifier: He was a historically profuse “bull**** artist.”
Picasso couldn’t draw like Raphael if he had a million years to try. This was Picasso’s narcissistic, lying left-wing persona speaking and covering for his inadequacies and insecurities. Remember that Picasso was an avowed communist.
Here’s another Picasso beauty: “I am always doing that which I can not do in order that I may learn how to do it.”
If you really think about this quote, it is ridiculous. Anybody could say that. In fact my mechanic said the very same thing once about working on a new type of fuel injector.
Here’s another gem: “Give me a museum and I’ll fill it.”
Please no, Pablo! Please don’t fill any more museums. There’s way too much of your detritus in the world as is.
Picasso is reputed to have made 20,000 artworks. Which is 20,000 too many. But to somebody like Picasso, quantity trumps quality, like one of those dictators who talks for hours and hours and says nothing.
Imagine a genuinely talented artist saying, “Give me a museum and I’ll fill it.” Does this not cheapen art?
Yes. But Picasso reduced art to a shoddy commodity to fill up museums as if they were commercial warehouses.
Or how about this zinger: “Good artists copy. Great artists steal.”
This was one of those things that Picasso said to appear hip and cool and ironic. But why would a good artist want to copy or a great artist want to steal from another artist in the first place? And what would an artist copy or steal anyway? Ideas? Subject matter? Technique? He certainly could not steal the actual talent, although most would if they could.
This is a ridiculous quote if you think about it. Except that it was intended to provoke the lesser minds who revere Picasso and are convinced that he was a genius. Which he was only in the area of self-promotion and bluster.
Picasso was the most significant figure in the 20th century ‘modern art’ movement. This movement, with one major exception, is not ‘high art’ but ‘popular art’ and it rules the international art world today. And when the elite snobs laugh at us for detesting Picasso, the joke is on them. Because the guy who looks at Picasso and says, “My kid could do that!” actually is correct. Picasso even admitted it, did he not?
In fact it is the Picasso Elites who are the true philistines. It is they who do not understand what ‘high culture’ really is. It is they whose world is full of cheap cartooning, scribbling and rendering (Picasso, Paul Klee, Jean Dubuffet, deKooning) or illustration and facsimile reproduction (Warhol, Pop Art) which are not historical disciplines of art but rather are disciplines of 20th century popular culture and advertising. The French surrealist Rene Magritte was trained not even in art but in advertising and his paintings appropriately look like they belong in advertisements. Andy Warhol started out as a commercial illustrator.
These Picasso Lovers are the same people who say that the Rolling Stones are just the modern-day reincarnation of Beethoven, that the only difference between the two is the times in which we live. Which is backhandedly true. Because today millions of educated people are willing to accept ‘popular culture’ as ‘high culture’ and do not even know the difference.
Now it has been reported that a “treasure trove” of 271 prints, drawings, and watercolors by Picasso has been discovered in a trunk in France at the home of one of Picasso’s former assistants.
To which we highly-cultured conservatives sniff, “Dear God, please help us. No more Picassos! Now we have 20,271 works too many.”
How did so-called ‘modern art’ evolve?
Answer: Because for millennia no-talent artists were kept out of art schools and the public eye. Discerning people had judged art on its merits.
This made the no-talents angry and so their no-talent descendants are taking revenge. Under ‘contemporary art’ or ‘modern art’ no-talent artists like Picasso are heralded and put in charge of art schools and serve as role models while genuinely gifted artists are ignored, discouraged or relegated to anonymity. Even the historical disciplines of art are deemed irrelevant. Picasso’s interpretation of ‘drawing’ is not drawing at all but low-rent cartooning.
This has occurred as the international left has gripped art for more than a century in order to do one thing: To destroy yet another aspect of the triumph of Western culture and replace it with mediocrity just as socialism always has done.
And in order to better understand the dichotomy, just take a look at the ‘high art’ of the Ancient Greeks or the Renaissance masters whose achievements seem otherworldly and almost beyond the capability of a human being.
What transpires today in the so-called ‘international art world’ from Beijing to Johannesburg to New York is a new form of World Art that surely makes the United Nations proud. It means that any person from any nation can be declared an international artistic genius equal to any other if so deemed by the elite. Feminists, gays, communists, Chinese, latinos, Africans… it makes no difference. Anyone can be a star. Talent is no issue whatsoever. Because we are all the same. Meanwhile the Western triumph is ignored because no-talent artists don’t have a prayer of ever achieving anything even vaguely like it.
Today terrible art shows up by the truckload at thousands of galleries from London to Johannesburg to Tokyo. These so-called ‘artists’ could never be considered good enough to even sweep the floors of the studio of a Greek master like Praxiteles. Their oeuvre is ham-handed, ugly and meaningless as required by the left.
If you like ‘popular art’ that is fine; ‘modern art’ is fine for you and Picasso is your guy. Galleries worldwide are brimming with the stuff. But don’t call it ‘high art’ and don’t call yourself highly cultured.
The popular and commercial nature of art today, along with the rhetorical bombast accompanying it, is what is attracting so much worldwide media attention and international wealth to it. Art has become just another commodity that moves across borders with impunity, and is making people rich and famous. Unfortunately it is all the wrong people and for all the wrong reasons.
Please visit my website at www.nikitas3.com for more. You can read excerpts from my book, Right Is Right, which explains why only conservatism can maintain our freedom and prosperity.