Author: mpratt

I was far more impressed with the Orsay than the Louvre. In fact, I was actually quite disappointed in the Louvre. The Orsay’s sculpture collection was insanely beautiful. It was almost as if the sculptures themselves were there to view the art as well, and we the viewers collectively moved through the museum with them. In contrast, going to the Louvre was like swimming against a school of fish as I go upcurrent and they go down. The mass amount of people there took away from the entire experience. I did not feel connected to the art at the Louvre. I felt like I was a part of the art at the Orsay. I liked how the Orsay also had smaller rooms with larger paintings versus the Louvre’s long vast halls with many paintings. I believe this comes from my wanting to be encompassed by the art — a feeling that the Louvre just simply cannot supply.

At the Musée de l’Orangerie I was moved by a painting of a cow in “Boeuf et tête de veau” by Chaïm Soutine. Soutine was obsessed with depictions of beef carcasses and had several jarring paintings of them within the museum. But, what I found most interesting is that Soutine would have the actual animal carcasses delivered to his home/studio, where he would then paint them abstractly. After doing an internet search on Soutine’s obsession, I was able to find this quote where he dives into his relationship with slaughter: “…once I saw the village butcher slice the neck of a goose and drain the blood out of it. I wanted to cry out, but his joyful expression caught the sound in my throat….. When I painted the beef carcass it was still this cry that I wanted to liberate. I have still not succeeded.”

Granted the highly emotional and deeper nature of these paintings, I was very surprised to find the paintings on greeting/post cards. I think that by commercializing these paintings, museums are taking away from the important social and emotional message that Soutine is attempting. This being said, I don’t neccessarily find it unethical, as from a PR persepctive the museum does not break any of the values in the PR society of America code of ethics values.

when I was nine years old I had to take part class. I specifically recall having a section on Picasso and his style of work. Although many believe that Picassos art is simple and childlike, I was specked him greatly for his creative ability. While we were looking at a lot of the paintings, I could recognize how unrefined the style is and why money may not recognize it as true art since it varies so far away from realism. But, after seeing it to Costco’s realistic line work and his ability to master both the abstract and realism is what makes him an impeccable artist. I think the main point of the Picasso’s renowned art is not that it requires immense skill. But instead, I believe that what makes Picasso notable as an artist is that what he produces requires immense creativity and expression. That is what makes art.