Did someone say have you gone crazy? How dare you? Leave our great artist alone.
First of all let me say this. The ethos of criticism just does not exist here on Gather although it does with great success on other networks. Here everything said is totally accepted and even lauded to the heavens. Please grant me the right to have a non-populist opinion.
Now speaking of heaven, I feel that while I'm a follower of the Lord, I should, as one of my duties, be able to recognise the handiwork of the devil and act accordingly.
If you would run up to me and eagerly say "hey the Picasso art exhibition is in town, let's go" I‘d say "no, not me" and here are my reasons:
Picasso (an adopted name) began painting in Spain doing many bull fight scenes. After his "blue" period went to Montmartre in Paris and soon had many well known artists and a poet or two around him in his Bateau Lavoir studio. They formed the so-called Bande Picasso. It included artists such as Modigliani, Max Ernst, Chagall, Diego Rivera, Chaim Soutine, Derain as well as the poet Max Jacob.
Picasso went through many stages of development and at 24 was already famous for his cubistic art style. He and George Braque had both become famous in this art form. During this period, he lived with his friend's girlfriend Eva as well as with Fernande. He then married Olga, a dancer ot the Diaghelev Ballet, and she bore him a son Paul. This was the only time that he married one of his woman but they were soon divorced.
Later he had affairs with Dora Maar and Marie Theresa Walter. Although Marie gave him a daughter Maria in 1935, he did not marry her.
Then he lived with a very good artist named Franscoise who gave birth to Claude (1947) and Paloma (1949). She left him in a foul mood and wrote a very unflattering book about him and revealed to the world his cruel streak.
This was about the time when he began distort his objects even more than before, fracturing them and so on. It is doubtful if he ever loved any his women except perhaps for Eva and Marie whom he may have loved but in his own way.
Yet in spite of this "love" he never signed any of the paintings that he gave to Marie and as a result of that she lived in poverty although she had a stack of Picasso originals kept in a store. He had deliberately kept back from signing them and so they were unmarketable. This was just one more of his many cruel and spiteful actions.
By now Picasso had begun to paint men and women in the most disgusting positions and it was the time when he was fascinated by satanic looking minotaurs.
Painter yes. Great graphical artist yes. Master of composition yes. But in his nature he was egotistical to the extreme and very cruel. He, for example left behind no will and in so doing left family and dependents destitute.
He would not let his children have his name and would not even let them into his house.
Here are some of the disasters and tragedies that he left behind.
Marie and Jacqueline both committed suicide. Dora ended her life in a mental asylum.
His grandson, Pablito, drank poison when he finally realised that he had been disowned although he was truly of bloodline heritage.
In the painting, by the internatonal impressionistic artist Margaret, the following cruel aspects of Picasso are highlighted:
Dora Maar is crouching in the background quite insane.
Franciose, in the role of a picador, is wounding Picasso in the cheek. This is a reference to Picasso burning her cheek with a cigarette while in Paris.
The horns of Picasso, the bull, have pierced the body of Marie.
His hoof is pushing agonisingly into the stomach of Fernande.
In the foreground he's using Jacqueline as a floor mop.
In the painting on the back wall Eva is shown in death.
I've written this because it's my conviction that I can't be the servant of the Lord if I don't recognise the agents of the devil and overpower them,




Comments: 36
The artist felt compelled to show the evil in Picasso's heart.
I posted this because I must be true to the principles that guide me.
I'm also happy that you're aware of the truth in the article and the painting?
i just don't care for cubism or whatever 'ism' you want to call it ... and i'm not a prude either.
but, i will measure the man & the work by what it 'really' has produced. like you so eloquently stated in your article ... a whole lot of nothing and with a lot of grief to those who could have loved him the most. sad ending for such a life. that is not living to me nor is that 'art to me. i guess picasso had a few 'devils' to deal with in more ways than one ...
oops ... a little more long winded on this one than i meant to be. sorry Fred. but not sorry you were so impugned in your journalistic approach toward picasso.
The world of art loved Picasso as a great great graphic artist who was driven by a mind that became more and more twisted as time went by. His sketches and paintings up to the age of 24 were almost beautiful.
It seems that when he left the age of innocence behind he sold his soul.
Even in caves in the SE of France, in Perpignan, there are truly wonderful wall paintings of absolutely magnificent horses by early cromagnon people who could not even write.
I can agree with most of what you say but some of your words helped me crystallise one aspect of Picasso that I despise. Amongst real men, there is an unwritten rule that you are honour bound not to put your discarded woman friend in any sort of bad light.
As Picasso lost interest in Dora, Jacqueline, Fernande and Franscoise he began to depict them in increasingly ugly ways. This was particularly evil as his paintings were being sold in great numbers and were being hung in galleries for all to see.
I don't think the word "jaded" that you used is strong enough. I would rather use the description "devastated".
Oh Van Gogh was a darling. He was very simple and absolutely devoted to his art.
Because of this he was very untidy and this may have prevented him from finding a wife.
He had another weakness, during his drinking bouts with Gaugin, the alcohol had a bad effect on him. Not like alcohol has on other men. It caused a poisoning of his mind and he would become irrational. It was on such an occasion with Gaugin that he sliced off his ear.
His letters to and from his brother Theo show the love that lay in the centre of Vincent's heart. He was eccentric but never evil.
No not our dear Vincent.
I love his work and I get emotionally involved in hi art.
Shine on!
This is the first time I am reading any of your articles. Your knowledge and presentation of Picasso makes me hungry for more... I look forward to reading more informative articles about other great artists too. But one point... can we not appreciate art as seperate from the personal histories of these disturbed men?
I am thinking of writing an article om my favourite artist Vincent van Gogh,
One can look at the man seperatley to his art, of course. But I can't do it.
I look at art at soul level. I get very involved. Any trace of gimmickry puts me off.
Picasso painted many wonderful works but he made many absolutely disgustng
works as well. He used his talent, unfortuhately, to draw hid woman in horrifically ugly ways. His cruelty I've described.
I just can't look at his work. I turn and walk away. Why should I look at the work of a monster if there are great artists like Ilya Ripon to admire?
Minnie for me, the soul of the creator lives in his works. If the creator is evil it does not mean that that he can't tempt you with great works. But so would the Devil if he should come to you.
Thank you for the welcome. I agree that we should avoid tempting, evil works, but try another question. Suppose we see a beautiful painting by an unknwn artist and are bewitched by the form, colors, theme. Later we discover the personal, horrible details that fill the personal canvas of the painter's/ writer's/ poet's life..will we stop admiring their work?
Im not dissuading you from you POV regardin Picasso, but the point remains, some works need to be viewed without the infamy/glory attatched to the names in the corners of those canvases/pages.
Again, I find the depth of your article admirable. Do write in that article about Van Gogh. May I request you to someday write about MONET too?
Now comes the point. I can't do that. I don't condemn people easily. In fact I seldom condemn ayone even a few bad ones that I've known. But when it comes to public figures that have influences on millions then I say NO. I feel that they were obliged to show that a God given talent should be used for God's purpose.
Monet! Of course. Do you admire him? I'll do an article on him and his friends. They were all so intertwined and so I'll have to include some of the others to complete the picture. It will be a great and rewarding study. Thanks for the idea.
OK, point understood:)
And yes, Im a great fan of Monet. I have made my own interpretations of his LILLIES which hang in my room today. I know some of his history, but Im sure you would know much more. Therefore the request.
Perhaps you should help me here and there. OK?
Thanks for expressing your views.
Check the security of your house...that painting is worth more than a million.
I know the Antibes place. Do you or did you ln France? Please tell me why your family was there.
Please don't tell your parents about my article. It's our little secret...OK
I'm busy with Van Gogh and Monet at the moment.