Profile of Human Rights, 1892
Picasso would have been 10 or 11 years old.
It’s worth pointing out that he was so talented because back then artists were highly valued in society. To the point where some painters were so coveted they were entirely taken care of by the people commissioning them, and those painters would go on to make house of apprentices where people would do nothing but paint all day. Painting was considered as much of a trade as plumbing or architecture. It’s an era lost to time and global capitalism.
Thank you for pointing this out! People consistently ignore things like this.
Picasso’s father was literally an art teacher, and was an incredibly skilled artist his entire life too. Picasso’s “talent” is entirely due to being a spoiled artist’s kid.
His father was a painter who specialised in naturalistic depictions of birds and other game. For most of his life, Ruiz was a professor of art at the School of Crafts and a curator of a local museum.
According to Wikipedia, Picasso’s professional-quality artist training under his father started prior to when he was 9.
So he had been training under his artist father for at least 1-2 years by the time he drew the above. Context matters.
I guess photography was a big reason as well.
Now we glorify capitalists and fuck everyone else
Picasso when he was trying, vs Picasso when he was cashing out on his fame, throwing some paint on the canvas in 5 minutes to get paid 10k for it.
Those are smaller parts of bigger pictures. They make more sense if you get the context of the rest of the picture.
If you zoom in enough on a pointillism piece, it will just be a colored dot. Anybody can make a dot. It takes basically zero skill. But when you look at the dot in the context of everything else, it becomes more clear that it’s not just a dot, but a dot in service of a greater vision.
Possessive?! As a PLURAL?!
I came in all prepared to give a bit of a mini essay on why Picasso gets less respect than he deserves, and folks beat me to it :)
He’s not even close to my favorite painter, I just tend to get disappointed when people get dismissive of non realism painting of any sort, unless it’s extremely ornate like Geiger.
Thank you, fediverse, for making my expectation of weaksauce takes fail!
Hey if you didn’t know, Picasso is a misogynist rapist
Tine to cancel him
Give me all his paintings so I can destroy them!
Yeah, right, I’m sure that’s exactly what you’d do with them.
Notices your username
Ah, you might actually do it…
He once heard from a Sherpa that you can crush up picasso’s, and snort them.
Everything is tessellated, great high.
Is it what he became famous and appreciated for?
Hey if you didn’t know, Picasso is a misogynist rapist
Bullshit and distortion successfully detected!
If Vincent is one too, I don’t want to know it, OK? I’m not going to buy one of his paintings anyways, so no harm done.
Time to re-establish this as my background image
Picasso made literal hundreds of sketches to plan and develop the exact layout and shape of each painting btw
Well, clearly he wasn’t a furry, or he’d be able to draw a better … … arctic fox? Cat? Albino opossum?
Yes, one of each and a ferret
I highly doubt that, the guy was a factory pumping out many thousands of pieces just cashing in
https://www.clrn.org/how-many-pieces-of-art-did-picasso-make/
What do you think
studies
and
preparatory sketches
are
That’s a weirdly cynical take that doesn’t refute what the commenter above said in the least.
Pablo Pablo Pablo Picasso, artistically gifted but some say he’s an asshole
Ok, but I ain’t no Rembrandt.
If you want to do something worth doing right, there’s a good chance you’ll make many attempts.
We’re not all Byrons either, apparently.
