Van Gogh, Ink Pen on Paper, 18.5 x 24.4 inch. Reference Image
I stumbled upon this image on a blog post at making a mark, which has a terrific section on Van Gogh landscape, in particular the sketches done in pencil or ink pen. This particular image reminded me of the Van Gogh painting I used as a reference when I did Pennsyltucky.
Oil on Canvas, 8 feet tall. Reference Image
Comments below are from the FAQ page of goodart.org, published and maintained by the pundit Brian Yoder.
Question: How can you say bad things about Picasso, Pollock, and Rothko? They were great artistic geniuses!
Answer: I can say bad things about them because they were not geniuses and because they didn't create good art. In fact, they made their fortunes based on the idea of producing things that were not even close to being good art, or art at all. Instead, they one way or another produced poor or non-art and "got away with it". There are objective ways of measuring the value of art (as I outlined above) and none of these "geniuses" came close to creating good art. The fact that they were famous and that many people have said and written nice things about them is no proof that they were geniuses or even artists. Objective truth is the proper measure of genius, not fame.
Here is one more, source = Robert Hughes (Time Magazine) from his book/video: American Visions – The Epic History of Art in America
The belief in the production of sublime awe that puffed up so much of the writing about abstract expressionism. The very definition of bullshit: empty depth.
Crayon on Xerox Paper, 8.5 x 11 inches. Dec, 2009. Reference Image
My good friend and fellow artist Joseph Chinnici did this in response to my 2009 Christmas card. It was the very best Christmas present I got this year. Thanks very much Joe - it means a lot to me.