Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2014 12:00:35 GMT -5
Good evening to you all! Due to unprecedented demand from around the world, everyone reading ' The Third' is cordially invited to see ' Mr. Turner' this weekend. Writing in today's FT, Nigel Andrews concludes that it’s a beautiful film because it isn’t afraid of beauty’s uglinesses. FT - Mr Turner – film review If you cannot make it in person, the key creatives of ' Mr. Turner' discuss the prolonged developmental process, researching the characters and creating a visual style worthy of the artist in the link below. BFI - Mr. Turner Q&APainting set free? Tate Britain - The EY Exhibition: Late Turner – Painting Set Free
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2014 6:57:59 GMT -5
Was it not Algernon Swinburne who in his 1868 Blake book exhorted us to attend to "Art for Art's sake first of all"? But no doubt the quivering females of British Broadcasting are more interested in biography than Art.
How do members rate these two on a scale of 1 to 10:
a) William Blake?
b) Joseph Turner?
I would give each of them a nine.
And which of their works do members most admire?
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Nov 1, 2014 11:07:53 GMT -5
How do members rate these two on a scale of 1 to 10: a) William Blake? b) Joseph Turner? I would give each of them a nine. And which of their works do members most admire? I think that I'd rate Blake around 7-8 and Turner 10. It's impossible to determine which of Turner's works I most admire, for there are so many works by him (undoubtedly more, in fact, than have even yet been documented), but I will relate an experience that I had a few years ago at the Frick in New York when I spent some ten minutes gazing in no small wonderment at one of his Italianate works which, on checking just now, seems no longer to be in the collection there and so might perhaps have been on loan to the gallery at that time - and then my companion who had taken me there said "now turn around", which I did and was faced with "The Harbour of Dieppe" at which I must have stood gaping in astonishment for half an hour or so and of which I could barely speak afterwards. So much activity and at the same time so much stillness encapsulated within such incredibly complex beauty and imagination. I couldn't understand why a minority of detractors at the time it was first shown were moaning about it being inappropriately Mediterranean in appearance and could only conclude that such sentiments had their origins in the sourest of grapes. I also saw (on the same visit to US) a couple of very early and very late works of his in Yale of which the latter was one of those extraordinary 20th century experiments that only he would dare do (around 1848, I think) and the earlier a piece of incredibly fine craftsmanship that implicitly revealed the underlying brilliance of his drawing technique - although onh that occasion the principal purpose of my visit was to see a Bibilcal triptych (a kind of before, during and after the Flood) by his younger contemporary John Martin which was being shown complete for the first time since soon after its completion in the 1840s (the middle one, as I recall, actually belonged to Yale, the last to a gallery in San Francisco and the first is part of the collection of HM the Queen. Martin is by no means as well appreciated today as is as Turner, nor does he appear to have been anything like as prolific, but it there was any British artist of Turner's day of like importance to Turner it was surely Martin.
|
|
|
Post by ahinton on Nov 1, 2014 11:10:49 GMT -5
How do members rate these two on a scale of 1 to 10: a) William Blake? b) Joseph Turner? I would give each of them a nine. And which of their works do members most admire? I think that I'd rate Blake around 7-8 and Turner 10. It's impossible to determine which of Turner's works I most admire, for there are so many by him, some not necessarily in a state of completion and ndoubtedly more than have even yet been documented; I will, however, relate an experience that I had a few years ago at the Frick in New York when I spent some ten minutes gazing in no small wonderment at one of his Italianate works (which, on checking just now, seems no longer to be in the collection there and so might perhaps have been on loan to the gallery at that time) - and then my companion who had taken me there said "now turn around", which I did and was faced with "The Harbour of Dieppe" at which I must have stood gaping in astonishment for half an hour or so and of which I could barely speak afterwards. So much activity and at the same time so much stillness encapsulated within such incredibly complex beauty, imagination and superhuman technical accomplishment. I couldn't understand why a minority of detractors at the time when it was first shown were moaning about it being inappropriately Mediterranean in appearance and could only conclude that such sentiments had their origins in the sourest of grapes. I also saw (on the same visit to US) a couple of very early and very late works of his in Yale of which the latter was one of those extraordinary 20th century experiments that only he would dare do (around 1848, I think) and the earlier a piece of incredibly fine craftsmanship (though far less individuality) that implicitly revealed the underlying brilliance of his drawing technique - although on that occasion the principal purpose of my visit had been to see a Biblical triptych (a kind of before, during and after the Flood, as it were) by his younger contemporary John Martin which was being shown complete for the first time since soon after its completion in the 1840s (the middle one, as I recall, actually belonged to Yale, the last (I think) to a gallery in San Francisco and the first is part of the collection of HM the Queen). Martin is by no means as well appreciated today as is Turner, nor does he appear to have been anything like as prolific, but if there was any British artist of Turner's day of like importance to Turner it was surely Martin. I think that, different as the two were in many ways, a complexity of imagination and expression was common to both and one could almost apply to Martin something of the "painting with steam" accolade that Constable famously accorded to Turner. When I think of both artists I cannot help but wish that I could compose as they did. Fat chance!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2014 19:43:10 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2014 12:47:01 GMT -5
The film was good!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2014 7:22:44 GMT -5
Thanks to members' suggestions I have now found the film, but not yet watched it. What an impressive painting this one is! It is entitled "War. The Exile and the Rock Limpet". www.tate.org.uk/art/images/work/N/N00/N00529_10.jpgClick on the jolly old link to see the full-size reproduction, although the limpet is still hiding in plain view. I suspect Mr. Turner had a sense of humour similar to that of our own Mr. c.
|
|