Ristorante Al Colombo Venezia

Marc Chagall
Le Cheval rouge, 1938

📸Miro at work
Which is the connection between and ?

Searching on the net , I found a couple of discussions about it…
🤔What do you think 🙄?
For instance, Christopher Willard, PhD. Philosophy/Artistic Research. Novelist. Artist, wrote:

“Usually the wrong one. While art requires one be serious and maybe even passionate about it, most people confuse this is focus on passion, while forgetting the seriousness of it. Seriousness in creating means ongoing learning and reflection. It means confronting weaknesses and growing. It’s hard, hard work. Passion is not a substitute but many think it is.

The example I give is this. I have no training on piano. But I could have more passion than anyone in the whole world, let’s assume I do and that it is known that I do. I rent Carnegie Hall and set up a piano concert. So I come on stage, and I’m so passionate I cry over the keyboard. I swoon and cry out, and shiver and all sorts of things. But to be clear my playing is absolute nothing. It’s terrible, it’s simply banging on the keys. Why? I have no training, no seriousness about what I do.

The uneducated about art public very often things that passion in movement, gestures, gestural brush strokes, etc means something is great. It’s a very naive viewpoint.

What lies behind this is that one has to really like what one does in art to stick with it for years — call that passion or stick-to-it-ness, the word doesn’t matter.”(*)

(*) source: https://www.quora.com/What-connection-do-you-see-between-art-and-passion

Yayoi Kusama
My heart’s abode
2016
Acrylic on canvas

In “Yayoi Kusama” at Victoria Miro, London.

Courtesy of KUSAMA Enterprise, Ota Fine Arts, Tokyo / Singapore and Victoria Miro, London. © Yayoi Kusama.

Anita Ekberg.

Rene Magritte, A storm, 1932

Marc Chagall
The Three Candles, 1938-1940
Oil on canvas
private collection

Il talk “Peggy Guggenheim e Alexander Calder” è dedicato ai profondi legami artistici e personali tra due straordinarie figure del Novecento. Per l’occasione, Karole P. B. Vail, Direttrice della Collezione Peggy Guggenheim Venezia, dialoga con Carmen Giménez, curatrice della mostra “Calder. Sculpting Time”

Il talk si svolgerà in lingua inglese, con traduzione simultanea in italiano.

📌 Venerdì 13 settembre, ore 18:30, Hall LAC

© 2024 Calder Foundation, New York / Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York

Rene Magritte

Pablo Picasso

Wassily Kandinsky - Amazon in Mountains, 1918. Glass painting, 12.2 × 9.8 in. (31.0 × 25.0 cm). @ The Russian Museum, Saint Petersburg, Russia

Egon Schiele:
«Seated Woman, Back View» (1917)
Gouache, watercolor, and pencil
46 x 29,5 cm
The Metropolitan Museum of Modern Art
(Kallir d1985)

In 1917, Edith Schiele, Egon’s wife, had issues with him drawing her n**e. As a result, in that year, her sister Adele became the model for many of Egon’s drawings. It’s not always clear if Egon Schiele was drawing Edith or Adele, as he often changed certain body features and hair color. Edith had more blondish hair, while Adele had redder hair, but this doesn’t definitively identify the model.

Marc Chagall
Flute Player, 1955
Oil on canvas

Joan Miró

Rene Magritte, Clear ideas, 1958

Vista l'ora, "Caffè a Venezia" di Manuel Domínguez Sánchez (1840–1906)...

Michelangelo Buonarroti ( 1475, Caprese Italy - 1564, Rome, Italy)
Madonna and Child 1525 c.
Black pencil, red pencil, white lead and ink on paper 54,1 x 39,6 cm
Casa Buonarroti , Florence


Executed an a support made by gluing two sheets of paper side by side, this drawing has been described as a “cartoon.” Yet it cannot be the preparatory phase for any work known to us, whether by Michelangelo or any artist linked to him. On the other hand, it is illuminating to think of this work, without parallel in the corpus of Michelangelo’s drawings, as a meditation on a motherhood too painful to permit the establishment of a true relationship of love with the child, a theme that constantly preoccupied the artist. It is no coincidence that the most notable correction on this sheet reveals that Michelangelo had originally drawn the Madonna’s face in profile, with her eyes lowered to gaze down at the Child: this was an echo of a tradition of tenderness between mother and child that the artist, here and in so many other places, was unable to accept from his teachers, preferring instead a dramatic absence of communication. In fact the image of the mother that we see now has a pose and expression that are totally detached from the baby at her breast, and a gaze that loses itself in the vision of future misfortunes. If we restrict our point of view merely to that of psychology and content, then there can be no doubt that the enigma of this gaze had already been explored by the adolescent Michelangelo, in the Madonna della scala. But the idea also evolved stylistically over the course of time, reaching a peak in the mysterious Madonna in the New Sacristy, whose undeniable affinities with this drawing provide confirmation of the date accepted here. Numerous retouches can also be seen in the Child, whose head is sketched with a delicate use of shading that makes it resemble that of the Mother. The body, on the other hand, drawn and finished to produce an effect of pictorial illusion, is totally devoid of any sense of the sacred, as Paola Barocchi has effectively summed up by speaking of the “powerful plasticism of the putto.”
The disparity in expressiveness and technique of representation between the two figures certainly renders any general interpretation of the drawing problematic. And yet it remains inexplicable that a few scholars, though of the stature of a Berenson or Dussler, should have used this disparity to deny Michelangelo’s authorship of the drawing. Michelangelo the Younger had recognized the excellence of the “cartoon,” placing it in the Camera degli Angioli, i.e. at the physical and spiritual center of the eighteenth-century rooms he created on the piano nobile of the house. But the drawing reached the peak of its fame in the nineteenth century, and in particular on the occasion of the centenary of Michelangelo’s birth in 1875, when the exhibition of drawings in Casa Buonarroti made the collection known abroad, as well. It was probably during these years that an intervention discovered during a restoration was made: the upper part of the sheet shows signs of having been cut off. This was probably done to make it fit into a frame, but it has removed the central part of the Madonna’s veil.

📸Mark Rothko in front of his painting “No.7”, 1960.

Marc Chagall

Salvador Dalí, Raphaelesque Head Exploding, 1951