敦
泰晤士(Times)在路上友投票出:1900年至今最大的家。票期16周,共投了有一百四十票,果
卡索(Pablo Picasso, 1881~ 1973)拔得。事上,不是第一份
卡索是代最大家的查了。多家而言,他心目中最大的家也都是 Picasso.
初我也是到的,才去
卡索的的。可是完,也不了解他什大。 那我才小,校了一套大部:世界人之的,我就了
卡索。 爸、,看到卡索的新,都他的比小孩子差竟然上百美金 (如果是今天那些都超千了吧!)所以,我更加好奇他什大,所以就他的,希望位人物。
至今,我依然法,卡索的有何人之。但是,以他不立新格,不留既有的名,不自我突破,真是大。站在格妮卡前,我是真地感到震撼,原是一大幅!(349 cm × 776 cm)我不太定,是的容感到震撼,是他的尺寸、色;是因站在
菲皇后美(Museo Reina Sofia),看到到幅名全世界的作品?
Guernica, 1937, Oil on canvas, 349 cm × 776cm Museo Reina Sofia, Madrid前十名分:
1. 卡索
2. 塞尚
3. 克林姆
4. 莫
5. 杜像
6. 斯
7. 波拉克
8. 渥荷
9. 德*
10. 蒙德里安
其中,第九名的Willem de Kooning,是我不的。生代西洋美史的老最喜的美代家就是 Pollock.
在份票果的分析中,
泰晤士也乍看得很平常,可是愈往後看愈奇怪。列了好位排名的家:Martin Kippenburger, Frida Kahlo。
From Times Online
June 8, 2009
The Times Top 200 Artists of the 20th Century to NowSixteen weeks after we invited you to have your say, the votes are in all 1.4 million of them. Here, we reveal the results of our poll, in conjunction with the Saatchi, to discover who you think are the greatest artists working since 1900.




At first glance, the results of this poll may seem rather predictable but
the longer you look, the more telling the quirks and anomalies become. This is precisely its point.
It’s not there to agree with. It is there to argue against.Several artists would seem to be enormously overrated. What is
Martin Kippenburger doing in the Top 20, rated above Rothko and Schiele and Klee? It feels like a blip which is probably appropriate for a radical who likes to barge in irreverently.
Frida Kahlo does not merit her top spot of 19. How can this solipsistic painting by-numbers-style recorder of her own misery be placed above Munch, with his otherworldly scream? She probably represents the woman’s vote. But then, why not put Louise Bourgeois far higher that septuagenarian who, rummaging about in the rag-and-bone shop of the heart, has had so pervasive an influence on future generations?
Influence, perhaps, is not adequately reflected in this list. Andy Warhol, who stamped the patterns of postmodernism, comes only eighth when the delightful but pre-eminently decorative Gustav Klimt comes in third. Do we, at heart, not appreciate the conceptual? Do we prefer a nice painting to a muddle of ideas? Marcel Duchamp, the father of the conceptual, is rated only fifth and Richard Hamilton and Gilbert and George, so profoundly influential on their peers, come in at 97 and 130. For the significance of their work, both should make the top quarter.
How do the British do? Francis Bacon, that impassioned outsider, misses making the Top Ten by only nine votes. After that, you have to wait until No 30 to find Lucian Freud, who attracts only half as many aficionados. But he is our first living British artist and his fellow contemporary, David Hockney, comes in close behind. They are the British Establishment and those impudent upstarts, the Brit pack, can’t knock them from their pedestals. Vote counts have halved by the time Tracey Emin and Damien Hirst come in neck and neck, within one vote of each other at 52 and 53 respectively. But our leading modernists it would seem, have fallen behind. Ben Nicholson and Barbara Hepworth limp home in the last quarter of the field, although Henry Moore, once a worldwide celebrity, manages to puff in at a just-about-respectable if not impressive No 49.
David Bomberg, the painter’s painter, is a completely underrated straggler. He is one of several real talents who have found themselves abandoned by a fickle world of fashion. Augustus John, once so suavely famous, is all but forgotten. And when it comes to more contemporary talents, surely, had this poll been taken five years ago, the fantastical avant-garde imagination of Matthew Barney would have ranked far more highly. And what happened to Walter de Maria, whose vast, zigzagging Lightning Field captures the electricity that flickers and forks across the New Mexican desert in the name of aesthetics, or James Turrell, who is transforming a volcanic crater into a vast observatory?
Painting is more appealing than sculpture, apparently. Constantin Brancusi, at 16, is the first sculptor to make the list, and although the emaciated striders of Alberto Giacometti are next, they only just manage to sneak into the first 25.
The results show a strong inclination towards the early modern, towards styles and experiments that have had a century or so to settle down through once-outraged sensibilities, forming the deep sediment of tastes. The Top Five artists have all been dead for at least 50 years. Jasper Johns, that great American flag-bearer for a now ubiquitous appropriation of populist iconography into art, is the first living artist on the list. He comes in at 19 and he is almost an octogenarian (although admittedly his close friend and artistic peer Robert Rauschenberg, who comes in six places and nearly 4,000 votes higher, died only last year).
The big, bold, pioneering talents of an audacious postwar America are the most popular after those of the early modern Europe which, again, is predictable. It is a preference that follows the art historical canon, which, as Europe disintegrated into two world wars, watched the artistic baton being carried more often than not in the hands of refugees to the States.
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/visual_arts/article6439243.ece
The poll is taken from Times Online. The copyright of this poll belongs to The Times. The Times is not involved with, nor endorse the production of this blog. 文章定位: