# If the Mona Lisa didn't exist, what would the default Greatest Painting be?



## Santino (Mar 26, 2018)

The Mona Lisa is often used as a sort of metonym or shorthand for art (that is Western art) in general. A bit like in the way that Beethoven's Fifth is shorthand for classical music, or Hamlet for English literature. I was idly wondering what other painting might have fulfilled this role if the Mona Lisa simply ceased to exist. Is there a widely acknowledged Second Greatest Painting in the world? (Whether or not you personally think the Mona Lisa is actually The Greatest Painting In The World is of course beside the point.)


----------



## strung out (Mar 26, 2018)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 26, 2018)




----------



## Santino (Mar 26, 2018)

strung out said:


> View attachment 131026


I love the way his nose follows you round the room.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 26, 2018)

To be srs: Monet’s Waterlillies is pretty popular.  Also Constable’s Hay Wain.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 26, 2018)

Sunflowers


----------



## 8115 (Mar 26, 2018)

The Scream.


----------



## tim (Mar 26, 2018)

There is only is one contender


----------



## JimW (Mar 26, 2018)

Along the River During the Qingming Festival - Wikipedia


----------



## dessiato (Mar 26, 2018)

For me it would possibly be any of the great paintings by Dali. But I  think possibly this is a more generally accepted great painting.


----------



## Bonfirelight (Mar 26, 2018)

The Scream and Sunflowers are good shouts.

other contenders given that i think you're after something great and classic and famous would be The Last Supper, Girl with a pearl earring, Birth of Venus, Guernica maybe..


----------



## Bonfirelight (Mar 26, 2018)

snap


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 26, 2018)

the alien take me to your dealer one


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 26, 2018)

This would be my choice....


----------



## Saul Goodman (Mar 26, 2018)

dessiato said:


> For me it would possibly be any of the great paintings by Dali. But I  think possibly this is a more generally accepted great painting.
> 
> View attachment 131035


She could do with a touch of moisturiser.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2018)




----------



## fishfinger (Mar 26, 2018)




----------



## Fez909 (Mar 26, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> View attachment 131038
> 
> This would be my choice....


This would be the popular choice, but I'd choose Guernica.


----------



## rekil (Mar 26, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> View attachment 131038
> 
> This would be my choice....


Looks like a mouldy cock going from the middle to the left, is it a Stanley Edwards?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Looks like a mouldy cock going from the middle to the left, is it a Stanley Edwards?



I'm sure you know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> I'm sure you know.


Looks too fine to be his blue nun period...


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Looks too fine to be his blue nun period...



Starry night....as you know...

Klimt deserves a spot...


----------



## Santino (Mar 26, 2018)

kabbes said:


> To be srs: Monet’s Waterlillies is pretty popular.  Also Constable’s Hay Wain.


I agree with Monet but I think Constable is probably not famous enough outside the UK.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 26, 2018)

it needs to be recognisable enough to work as an allusion in the simpsons - most of these don't.


----------



## Santino (Mar 26, 2018)

I'd put the creation of Adam from the Sistine Chapel in as a candidate too.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 26, 2018)

naked venus? in the seashell, last supper in with a shout


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 26, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> naked venus? in the seashell, last supper in with a shout



Shall i tell him?


----------



## RoyReed (Mar 26, 2018)

or


----------



## dessiato (Mar 26, 2018)

I first saw Botticelli's Birth of Venus in Florence when I was 14. I still remember the impact it had on me. So I don't really know which to choose. The more I think about it the more wonderful paintings come to mind.


----------



## RainbowTown (Mar 26, 2018)

So, so many to choose from...but this would certainly be a contender.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 26, 2018)

Flippant answer:


----------



## Gromit (Mar 26, 2018)

Santino said:


> The Mona Lisa is often used as a sort of metonym or shorthand for art (that is Western art) in general. A bit like in the way that Beethoven's Fifth is shorthand for classical music, or Hamlet for English literature. I was idly wondering what other painting might have fulfilled this role if the Mona Lisa simply ceased to exist. Is there a widely acknowledged Second Greatest Painting in the world? (Whether or not you personally think the Mona Lisa is actually The Greatest Painting In The World is of course beside the point.)


By greatest all you really mean is most famous...

Second most famous would be Van Go's Sunflowers but as he did several the fame is split. 

Which leaves Rembrandt's Night Watch.

None of which are truly the greatest.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 26, 2018)

I'm sure Leonardo is extremely well-known, but I'd guess that the Mona Lisa is better-known, that there are people who know the painting but not the artist.

Not sure that's true about van Gogh, but it would be true about Vermeer or Munch. The Scream is a good shout. Definitely passes butchers' Simpsons test.

Does anyone know how long the Mona Lisa has been the most famous painting in the world?


----------



## Gromit (Mar 26, 2018)




----------



## Gromit (Mar 26, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Sunflowers


Which one?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 26, 2018)




----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 26, 2018)

If we're being serious about this, it would have to be something equally old and most likely also from the Italian Renaissance. Something that has been revered for a long time. I seem to remember from the few art history classes I've taken that at some point (Victorians?) it was decided that this era was the pinnacle of human creation. (Help me people with more knowledge!).

So I think dessiato is probably on to something with the Birth of Venus. I have an issue with that as being the world's greatest (by which I think we mean most popular) painting though as it's a bit old and not as naturalistic as later painting for many people's taste. It requires some knowledge of the subject matter to understand what it's about rather than the simple impact of a portrait. Girl with a Pearl Earring is definitely a contender although I'm not sure the Dutch masters received quite the same level of reverence as the Italians when all this revering was going on.

Or we could just carry on posting our favourite paintings which is fine by me


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 27, 2018)

Ok....renaissance art then?

Rembrandt... self portrait with two circles.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 27, 2018)

Portrait of Giovanna Tournabuoni by Domenico Ghirlandaio 1488.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

Mrs Miggins


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 131103
> Mrs Miggins



Nice fork.


----------



## strung out (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 27, 2018)

strung out said:


>



There's that 3 pronged fork again....tsk.tsk.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)

Nice sausage dam


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Bonfirelight (Mar 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Does anyone know how long the Mona Lisa has been the most famous painting in the world?


I seem to remember it was considerably later than when it was painted.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)

Bonfirelight said:


> I seem to remember it was considerably later than when it was painted.


Looked this up this afternoon and it only became famous when it was stolen from the Louvre in 1911. Which explains a lot as it's really not all that.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)

Wayhey! This fella's always good for a laugh


----------



## dessiato (Mar 27, 2018)

Mrs Miggins said:


> Wayhey! This fella's always good for a laugh
> View attachment 131107


I'm not sure about his attitude. It seems a little cavalier.


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Mar 27, 2018)

If we’re thinking if something that would take the place of the Mona Lisa, it would have to hit all the same notes in terms of when and how it would have been shown and indicated over the same time span. So yes, in the Simpsons but also in schools and on posters and postcards. Easily recogniseable in term states of shape, outline, so easy to parody and copy too.

So I think it would have to show a human full face, probably a woman, not a nude (otherwise the Birth of Venus would probably be the Greatest Painting In The World anyway). And probably not a religious painting either, otherwise it already would be a Madonna or a Pieta or something Jesus-y.

Girl with Pearl Earring hits all those targets.


ETA And something that someone wanted to steal so it could become so famous. So not enormous.


----------



## Bonfirelight (Mar 27, 2018)

Mrs Miggins said:


> Looked this up this afternoon and it only became famous when it was stolen from the Louvre in 1911. Which explains a lot as it's really not all that.


That's the one, cheers


----------



## dessiato (Mar 27, 2018)

SheilaNaGig said:


> If we’re thinking if something that would take the place of the Mona Lisa, it would have to hit all the same notes in terms of when and how it would have been shown and indicated over the same time span. So yes, in the Simpsons but also in schools and on posters and postcards. Easily recogniseable in term states of shape, outline, so easy to parody and copy too.
> 
> So I think it would have to show a human full face, probably a woman, not a nude (otherwise the Birth of Venus would probably be the Greatest Painting In The World anyway). And probably not a religious painting either, otherwise it already would be a Madonna or a Pieta or something Jesus-y.
> 
> ...


The Athena tennis girl poster fits a lot of those criteria.


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Mar 27, 2018)

SheilaNaGig said:


> If we’re thinking if something that would take the place of the Mona Lisa, it would have to hit all the same notes in terms of when and how it would have been shown and indicated over the same time span. So yes, in the Simpsons but also in schools and on posters and postcards. Easily recogniseable in term states of shape, outline, so easy to parody and copy too.
> 
> So I think it would have to show a human full face, probably a woman, not a nude (otherwise the Birth of Venus would probably be the Greatest Painting In The World anyway). And probably not a religious painting either, otherwise it already would be a Madonna or a Pieta or something Jesus-y.
> 
> ...




Lady with an Ermine probably hits most of these targets.


----------



## mrsfran (Mar 27, 2018)

I think you'd have to go with Starry Night, Waterlillies, Birth of Venus or Girl with a Pearl Earring. I'd like the Arnolfini Portrait in there too, but perhaps that's not well-known enough.

The Last Supper too. Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grand Jatte?


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)

SheilaNaGig said:


> If we’re thinking if something that would take the place of the Mona Lisa, it would have to hit all the same notes in terms of when and how it would have been shown and indicated over the same time span. So yes, in the Simpsons but also in schools and on posters and postcards. Easily recogniseable in term states of shape, outline, so easy to parody and copy too.
> 
> So I think it would have to show a human full face, probably a woman, not a nude (otherwise the Birth of Venus would probably be the Greatest Painting In The World anyway). And probably not a religious painting either, otherwise it already would be a Madonna or a Pieta or something Jesus-y.
> 
> ...


My first choice above is almost the anti-greatest by those criteria


----------



## SheilaNaGig (Mar 27, 2018)

dessiato said:


> The Athena tennis girl poster fits a lot of those criteria.




Except it’s her bum from behind, so not a face. But yes. That’s probably why she’s so famous too.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)

Great choice mrsfran


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> View attachment 131102
> Portrait of Giovanna Tournabuoni by Domenico Ghirlandaio 1488.


That is so beatiful. I can't stop looking at it.


----------



## Corax (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 27, 2018)

Mrs Miggins said:


> That is so beatiful. I can't stop looking at it.



It has had the same affect on me since I first saw it in 1979. Ghirlandaio was Michelangelo’s teacher. The original is in the Thyssen in Madrid if you ever get the chance to visit.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 27, 2018)

Another personal favourite.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

Mrs Miggins said:


> Great choice mrsfran
> View attachment 131110


saw that the other day in the national gallery


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

Mrs Miggins said:


> View attachment 131106


saw that the other day, too, in the national gallery


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 27, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


>



Every picture tells a story or at least inspires  us to use our own creativity.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)

You're making me miss the National Gallery Pickman's


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

Mrs Miggins said:


> You're making me miss the National Gallery Pickman's


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 27, 2018)

Hellelil and Hildebrand, the Meeting on the Turret Stairs by Frederic William Burton


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Santino (Mar 27, 2018)

How about a round of great horse's arses in art?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)

Stop it Pickman's


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)

You want horses arse? I'll give you horses arse (bottom right - can't find a clearer image but trust me - it is the biggest, fattest horses arse in art history)


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

two arses in this picture


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Dr. Furface (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## andysays (Mar 27, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


>


I can't see a horse in this picture. Is it one of those magic eye things?


----------



## Dr. Furface (Mar 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> I can't see a horse in this picture. Is it one of those magic eye things?


It's next to the cow


----------



## andysays (Mar 27, 2018)

Now I see it!


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 27, 2018)

its a boat


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> its a boat


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


>




looks like a stanley edwards to me

e2a: the more i look the filthier that picture is. the only really decent bit of painting is the squirrel on the right hand side.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

you can see the squirrel looking left in profile


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 27, 2018)

Google suggests that The Arnolfini portrait has a lot of parody versions so that fits with one of SheilaNaGig's suggested criteria.


----------



## Mumbles274 (Mar 27, 2018)

Good thread. So many to chose from. I think it has to be instantly responsible? 3 quick offerings from me


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Mumbles274 (Mar 27, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> View attachment 131181


Not many paintings can be said to start a whole art movement

Edit. NVM wrong painting lol


----------



## 8115 (Mar 27, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> View attachment 131181


Is that Turner?


----------



## Mumbles274 (Mar 27, 2018)

Mistook it for this


----------



## Sea Star (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## SheilaNaGig (Mar 27, 2018)

SheilaNaGig said:


> Lady with an Ermine probably hits most of these targets.




I meant to post this earlier and didn’t. So here it is.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 27, 2018)

8115 said:


> Is that Turner?



It is, The ‘Fighting’ Temeraire.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## Dr. Furface (Mar 27, 2018)




----------



## killer b (Mar 27, 2018)

I went to Amsterdam last year, my dad told me I _needed_ to go to reichsmuseum and see the Vermeers. Yeah whatever I thought, but we went anyway, and jesus but he was right. 

This is the best one anyway, and the world's greatest painting (although it fails the simpsons test)


----------



## killer b (Mar 27, 2018)

This one too. Vermeer was the best.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

Sea Star said:


> View attachment 131186


Mrs slocombe out of are you being served second from left


----------



## Dr. Furface (Mar 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Mrs slocombe out of are you being served second from left


With a young Harvey Weinstein leching from behind


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 28, 2018)

By the artist in the self-portrait in post #3


----------



## JimW (Mar 28, 2018)

killer b said:


> This is the best one anyway, and the world's greatest painting (although it fails the simpsons test)


Easy to 'shop her as posting on a phone though.


----------



## dessiato (Mar 28, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


>


I know it's supposed to be a great painting but it does nothing for me. When I went to see it I was left with a strong sense of being almost let down by it. I'd heard for many years about how wonderful it is, and IMO it just isn't. Good, absolutely, great, no.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 28, 2018)

dessiato said:


> I know it's supposed to be a great painting but it does nothing for me. When I went to see it I was left with a strong sense of being almost let down by it. I'd heard for many years about how wonderful it is, and IMO it just isn't. Good, absolutely, great, no.



I used to look at it in art books when I was younger, and fully believed that the photos of it were just black and white because "costs".
It came as a massive disappointment to me to see that in reality it was monochrome.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 28, 2018)

killer b said:


> I went to Amsterdam last year, my dad told me I _needed_ to go to reichsmuseum and see the Vermeers. Yeah whatever I thought, but we went anyway, and jesus but he was right.
> 
> This is the best one anyway, and the world's greatest painting (although it fails the simpsons test)


I used to have a postcard of that next to a postcard of this around my desk at work. I love looking at them side by side


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 28, 2018)




----------



## dessiato (Mar 28, 2018)

Mrs Miggins said:


> I used to have a postcard of that next to a postcard of this around my desk at work. I love looking at them side by side
> View attachment 131197


The more I think about it the more I think Vermeer has to be the creator of some of the all time great paintings.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Mar 28, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2018)

this is a huge picture, the triumph of death. it's in palermo and it occupies a wall, and not a small wall at that. must be in the region of 6m x 6.5m


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Mar 28, 2018)

For my grandparents' generation this was 'proper art' 





Laughing Cavalier - Wikipedia


----------



## strung out (Mar 28, 2018)

SheilaNaGig said:


> If we’re thinking if something that would take the place of the Mona Lisa, it would have to hit all the same notes in terms of when and how it would have been shown and indicated over the same time span. So yes, in the Simpsons but also in schools and on posters and postcards. Easily recogniseable in term states of shape, outline, so easy to parody and copy too.
> 
> So I think it would have to show a human full face, probably a woman, not a nude (otherwise the Birth of Venus would probably be the Greatest Painting In The World anyway). And probably not a religious painting either, otherwise it already would be a Madonna or a Pieta or something Jesus-y.
> 
> ...


This hits all of those targets too I think


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Mar 28, 2018)

Well, if were doing paintings of boats:






I have stood in front of this painting for hours, studying the brushwork.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 28, 2018)




----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Mar 28, 2018)

Yellow Band, Rothko


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2018)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Well, if were doing paintings of boats:
> 
> 
> 
> ...







i have stood in front of this for minutes admiring the brushwork


----------



## kabbes (Mar 28, 2018)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Yellow Band, Rothko


Filthy bastard.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2018)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Yellow Band, Rothko







yves klein, untitled monochrome blue


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Mar 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yves klein, untitled monochrome blue








Robert Rauschenberg, White painting 1951.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2018)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Robert Rauschenberg, White painting 1951.



anemic albinos in winter camouflage throwing snowballs in a blizzard (pickman's model, 2018)


----------



## Sea Star (Mar 28, 2018)

for my grand parents generation this was proper art 






used to see variations of this everywhere when i was a kid.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Mar 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 131248
> anemic albinos in winter camouflage throwing snowballs in a blizzard (pickman's model, 2018)








Yuwipi Woman, paper moon (2018)


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Mar 28, 2018)

Sea Star said:


> for my grand parents generation this was proper art
> 
> 
> 
> ...




My grandparents raised 12 kids (and 2 grandchildren) in a two-room, dirt floor shack, but they had a print of this on the wall:


----------



## Sea Star (Mar 28, 2018)

you've reminded me - my great grandparents had a print of this on the wall. Used to see this being used a lot as well.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 28, 2018)

That cat is getting ready to fuck up her soldiers.


----------



## peterkro (Mar 28, 2018)




----------



## ElizabethofYork (Mar 28, 2018)

Another wonderful Vermeer


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 28, 2018)

peterkro said:


> View attachment 131253



I can't unsee Homer Simpson in that.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 28, 2018)

ElizabethofYork said:


> Another wonderful Vermeer



That is beautiful. He was so brilliant at capturing light.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 28, 2018)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Yuwipi Woman, paper moon (2018)




Many injuries occur during office parties when this sort of thing happens...


----------



## Santino (Mar 28, 2018)

I think this is my shortlist from the various nominations.

Botticelli - Birth of Venus
Klimt - The Kiss
Leonardo - The Last Supper
Michelangelo - the Creation of Man
Monet - Waterlillies
Munch - The Scream
Picasso - Guernica
Rembrandt - [one of self portraits]
Van Eyck - Arnolfini double portrait
Van Gogh - Sunflowers, Starry Night
Velazquez - Las Meninas
Vermeer - Girl with a Pearl Earring

In some ways Hokusai's The Wave is a very strong contender, but of course it is not strictly speaking a piece of Western art.

I'm tempted to rule out some of the more modern ones, Klimt, Munch and Picasso, for being too much a symbol of post-1900 painting, rather than the whole tradition. Picasso in particular still 'stands for' modern art.

As it also needs to be something easy to represent in a parody or something like an emoji, I'd also rule out anything too busy - so that's Botticelli, The Last Supper and Las Meninas out too. So we're left with:

Michelangelo - the Creation of Man
Monet - Waterlillies
Rembrandt - [one of self portraits]
Van Eyck - Arnolfini double portrait
Van Gogh - Sunflowers, Starry Night
Vermeer - Girl with a Pearl Earring


----------



## kabbes (Mar 28, 2018)

Santino said:


> I think this is my shortlist from the various nominations.
> 
> Botticelli - Birth of Venus
> Klimt - The Kiss
> ...


Despite my nomination originally being Waterlillies, I think I’m persuaded either to Pearl Earing or Sunflowers, each for their greater iconic value in the general gestalt. Scream is arguably the most iconic but I don’t think the public views it as “best painting” so much as “quite groovy”


----------



## 8115 (Mar 28, 2018)

I put The Scream down as a joke, I don't know what kind of dystopia it would be the world's greatest painting in.  Oh wait...


----------



## rekil (Mar 28, 2018)

Big list of art references in The Simpsons here. Loads I'd never heard of. No Puss in Boots by Gustav Dore unfortunately. Delacroix was referenced following the Charlie Hebdo massacre.  

The Complete History Of Art References In The Simpsons


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2018)

Santino said:


> I think this is my shortlist from the various nominations.
> 
> Botticelli - Birth of Venus
> Klimt - The Kiss
> ...


the arnolfini picture: there's two people in it but it's not the arnolfini double portrait. it's either 'the arnolfini portrait' or 'portrait of giovanni(?) arnolfini and his wife' (according to the national gallery and they should know Jan van Eyck | The Arnolfini Portrait | NG186 | National Gallery, London)


----------



## JimW (Mar 28, 2018)

Remember reading this was one of the most sold (well, distributed more likely) prints of all time. 
Chairman Mao en route to Anyuan - Wikipedia


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 28, 2018)

8115 said:


> I put The Scream down as a joke, I don't know what kind of dystopia it would be the world's greatest painting in.  Oh wait...


It's an ace painting. I'd shove it forward ahead of the Mona Lisa if I were trying to explain painting to an alien.


----------



## tim (Mar 28, 2018)

As a proud Hounslow, I shoild point out that werew the Paris Monday Mona Lisa be destroyed tomorrow there  would still be the Isleworth Mona Lisa, which is better because it has got columns and waa painted when Lisa was younger


----------



## RoyReed (Mar 28, 2018)

Santino said:


> In some ways Hokusai's The Wave is a very strong contender, but of course it is not strictly speaking a piece of Western art.


Well it's not a painting either, but I think limiting this to just 'Western' art is too parochial. It does meet just about every other criterion for being one of the best known, most iconic images ever produced.

On the other hand this would be my preference to the Mona Lisa.


----------



## Santino (Mar 29, 2018)

RoyReed said:


> Well it's not a painting either, but I think limiting this to just 'Western' art is too parochial. It does meet just about every other criterion for being one of the best known, most iconic images ever produced.


That's kind of the point of the discussion.


----------



## killer b (Mar 29, 2018)

There was once an original painting of the great wave, but the process of making the block for printing will have destroyed it...


----------



## mwgdrwg (Mar 29, 2018)




----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 29, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


>





strung out said:


> This hits all of those targets too I think




Is it odd that I find that first painting very disturbing but the second one not so much?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Is it odd that I find that first painting very disturbing but the second one not so much?


yes


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yes



The first one...creepy eyes are frightening and he has a weird leery smile.
The second one...is someone crying and upset..maybe they saw the first picture and it upset them.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 29, 2018)

The eyes fail to follow one around the room though ...


----------



## strung out (Mar 29, 2018)

IIn terms of ubiquity, I've seen prints/copies of J H Lynch paintings almost more than anything else over the last few years, e.g.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Mar 29, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Is it odd that I find that first painting very disturbing but the second one not so much?


What's odd is that you're asking us why you think one is more disturbing than the other.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 29, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> What's odd is that you're asking us why you think one is more disturbing than the other.



Lol...perhaps I'm just wondering


----------



## JimW (Apr 11, 2018)

This was mentioned in a Chinese historical novel I'm reading, have to confess hadn't even heard of the (famous) painter Kramskoi and reading the Wiki entry it's got a lot of Mona Lisa-esque qualities; clearly well-known in Russia and China (working class character brings home a print in my novel) and the art world:




Portrait of an Unknown Woman - Wikipedia


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Apr 11, 2018)




----------



## killer b (Apr 11, 2018)




----------



## rekil (Apr 11, 2018)




----------



## rekil (Apr 11, 2018)

No this is my favourite now. 



Spoiler: it's big







Bless you Jon McNaughton.


----------



## killer b (Apr 11, 2018)

who is the blue suit guy? another everyman character, or some repub buffoon?


----------



## rekil (Apr 11, 2018)

killer b said:


> who is the blue suit guy? another everyman character, or some repub buffoon?


 "The Modern Christian" apparently.  



Spoiler


----------



## Santino (Apr 12, 2018)

copliker said:


> No this is my favourite now.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I need one of those Excel quizzes with this so I can spend all day at work identifying the people in it.


----------



## rekil (Apr 12, 2018)

Santino said:


> I need one of those Excel quizzes with this so I can spend all day at work identifying the people in it.


I like the three stooges "y I oughta" motif but unimpressed that Stalin is towering over Napoleon.


----------



## Epona (Apr 12, 2018)

killer b said:


>



OMFG I love you for doing that xx


----------



## hash tag (Apr 12, 2018)

Not really my cuppa, but seeing this in the flesh, the colours are extraordinary


----------



## hash tag (Apr 12, 2018)

dessiato said:


> For me it would possibly be any of the great paintings by Dali. But I  think possibly this is a more generally accepted great painting.
> 
> View attachment 131035



I discovered Yves Tanguy last week.....


----------



## Epona (Apr 12, 2018)

No offense, but I just kind of object to the default position that the Mona Lisa is the greatest painting of all time, and that we'd have to pretend it didn't exist in order to elect something different.  And I'd be hard pressed to pick 1 painting out of everything available.


----------



## hash tag (Apr 12, 2018)

Don't be such a Grinch. How much of an excuse do you want to post a picture of a beautiful painting. When my daughter was a babe, she loved this; landseers dignity and impudence


----------



## Ax^ (Apr 12, 2018)




----------



## Santino (Apr 12, 2018)

Epona said:


> No offense, but I just kind of object to the default position that the Mona Lisa is the greatest painting of all time, and that we'd have to pretend it didn't exist in order to elect something different.  And I'd be hard pressed to pick 1 painting out of everything available.


That's not really the point of the thread though.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 13, 2018)

Epona said:


> ... the default position that the Mona Lisa is the greatest painting of all time, and that we'd have to pretend it didn't exist in order to elect something different.



Is very, very different to:



Santino said:


> The Mona Lisa is often used as a sort of metonym or shorthand for art (that is Western art) in general. A bit like in the way that Beethoven's Fifth is shorthand for classical music, or Hamlet for English literature. I was idly wondering what other painting might have fulfilled this role if the Mona Lisa simply ceased to exist.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Apr 14, 2018)

JimW said:


> This was mentioned in a Chinese historical novel I'm reading, have to confess hadn't even heard of the (famous) painter Kramskoi and reading the Wiki entry it's got a lot of Mona Lisa-esque qualities; clearly well-known in Russia and China (working class character brings home a print in my novel) and the art world:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That is one of my all time favourite paintings. You can't really compare it to the Mona Lisa, but it is a fucking fantastic painting.

In general response to the thread OP...

Leonardo had a couple up his sleeve. He would come First and Second without Mona Lisa, because he wasn't just genius artist, he was genius everything. He could sell his talent in his time. I think only Van Gogh comes close. He may come closer in 300 years time, or he may be left further behind. Da Vinci took the gig whilst it was available, and I doubt very much if anyone else in the next Millennium will get even close.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Apr 14, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Not really my cuppa, but seeing this in the flesh, the colours are extraordinary


Yes that is phenomenal in the flesh


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2018)

Another vote for Turner from me.

And...
It just struck me again how truly amazing the internet is...we are so used to it now that the awe is partly gone, but to be able to see any famous painting you want, in the time it takes to type or say it's name is really great.


----------



## dessiato (Apr 15, 2018)

Mrs Miggins said:


> Yes that is phenomenal in the flesh


That's so very true. Most Dali I've seen have been truly awesome when you are standing in front of them. The size makes you wonder how he managed to conceive and produce them. I couldn't single out any one as above the others.

One Hopper I especially like has no impact until you see it. The finess of the art, the life and movement, his work depicting the effects of light on the subject, are all utterly amazing. You don't get this overwhelming effect until you are in front of it.


----------



## Mrs Miggins (Apr 15, 2018)

I'll never forget being totally blown away by the Carravaggio exhibition at the National several years ago. I was so captured by the paintings that I thought I'd buy the book but absolutely everything that made them great was lost in reproduction.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2018)

I mentioned the Hay Wain at the start of this thread.  I thought that painting was twee rubbish until I actually saw it in the flesh, at which point I was blown away.

It’s true, though, to a greater or lesser extent, for all art, I think, and particularly oil paintings.  There’s something about the textures, scale and sheer majesty of them that just can’t be captured in a book or on a screen, or even by an A0 sized print.


----------



## hash tag (Apr 15, 2018)

Constable was a half decent painter, much sniffed at because of his commercial success perhaps.
speaking of English artists, Hogarth was tremendous. Just how did he get so much character into so many of his pictures when they were just black and white. It's beyond me.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 15, 2018)

All those people who said they didn't get Mark Rothko until they saw one in real life at which point they broke down in tears, were transported to hitherto unimagined realms of pure delight, got up out of their wheelchairs for the first time in thirty years or whatever are full of shit. Bullshit seen up close is still bullshit.


----------



## hash tag (Apr 15, 2018)

I couldn't believe this was by Rothko when I saw it last week. Like you say, buckshot is still buckshot, however much you polish it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 15, 2018)

hash tag said:


> I couldn't believe this was by Rothko when I saw it last week. Like you say, buckshot is still buckshot, however much you polish it.
> View attachment 132903



You can see why the 'attempting to paint actual stuff' phase of his career didn't last long eh?


----------



## dessiato (Apr 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> All those people who said they didn't get Mark Rothko until they saw one in real life at which point they broke down in tears, were transported to hitherto unimagined realms of pure delight, got up out of their wheelchairs for the first time in thirty years or whatever are full of shit. Bullshit seen up close is still bullshit.


There's a lot of bullshit talked in the art world. IMO some of the worst for this in recent times were the YBA, but it certainly predates them. 

Years ago I did an art history course which was very interesting. But when we looked at things like this:





I upset a lot of people who insisted it _is _art. Whilst there is, arguably, a certain artistry in the object, and it certainly has merit as a piece e of design, the only thing that the so-called artist actually did was to write a name on it. So, if it is art, the recognition should go at least as much to the original designer, and to the people who produce it, as to Duchamp who claims it as his. 

It seems that a lot of people now practise the emperor's new clothes approach to what is art.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 15, 2018)

Duchamp was taking the piss.


----------



## Santino (Apr 15, 2018)

It isn't necessarily even 'by' Duchamp. It might have been by a woman colleague of his.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 15, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s true, though, to a greater or lesser extent, for all art, I think, and particularly oil paintings.  There’s something about the textures, scale and sheer majesty of them that just can’t be captured in a book or on a screen, or even by an A0 sized print.


 Absolutely. I wasn't that bothered about Klimt, for example, until I saw his _The Maiden _in Prague. It's incredible in the flesh. Same as Vermeer. I've seen eleven of his works and they're genuinely spine-tingling. Something about the light and stillness just does it for me.


----------



## little_legs (Apr 15, 2018)

Salvator Mundi


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> All those people who said they didn't get Mark Rothko until they saw one in real life at which point they broke down in tears, were transported to hitherto unimagined realms of pure delight, got up out of their wheelchairs for the first time in thirty years or whatever are full of shit. Bullshit seen up close is still bullshit.



Do you remember this?
Art that people rave about that's actually shit.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2018)

S☼I said:


> Absolutely. I wasn't that bothered about Klimt, for example, until I saw his _The Maiden _in Prague. It's incredible in the flesh. Same as Vermeer. I've seen eleven of his works and they're genuinely spine-tingling. Something about the light and stillness just does it for me.



Yep. Vermeer had fantastic control of light. Literally. He painted using a camera obscura ...

_"The art of chiaroscuro:
To create the astounding effects of light and shadow, it is believed that Vermeer used the camera obscura - a box with a hole with a lens in it. The inside of the box would be painted white and using a series of lenses and mirrors it would reflect the outside image within. This would intensify the light and shadows of the reflection, allowing the artist to see finer detail of light and shadow on surfaces and objects.
There is a great deal of evidence in Vermeer's works that he used this device, particularly in paintings such as The Lady with the Red Hat and The Lacemaker.
This technique assisted Vermeer in capturing minute details and highlighted aspects of surfaces and objects in dimmed or stark lighting conditions that created spectacular effects through the various lenses and mirrors.
This contraption also allowed for shadow lines to be much harsher and bold and this can be seen in the artist's take on clothing and fabrics. Another benefit of using the camera was that Vermeer did not have to constantly move around to catch finer detail for close-ups - he would continue looking inside the box without interrupting his flow of work"
Johannes Vermeer Style and Technique_


----------



## killer b (Apr 15, 2018)

The Vermeer camera obscura theory is just that, a theory. There's no convincing supporting evidence I've seen. He could just have been an amazing painter.


----------



## Santino (Apr 15, 2018)

He could have used a camera obscura AND been an amazing painter.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Apr 15, 2018)

dessiato said:


> I upset a lot of people who insisted it _is _art. Whilst there is, arguably, a certain artistry in the object, and it certainly has merit as a piece e of design, the only thing that the so-called artist actually did was to write a name on it. So, if it is art, the recognition should go at least as much to the original designer, and to the people who produce it, as to Duchamp who claims it as his.


The point is that it was Duchamp (and nobody else) who had the idea of taking this everyday object (which he didn't create) and displaying it as a work of art, thereby demanding the viewer to think about not only the validity of the object itself as a piece of art, but also his own validity as an artist, as well as the very notion of what art is and can be. Yes it's absurd, comical and ridiculous, but it's also profound and challenging - and that's why it's an important piece of art. It clearly had quite an effect on you anyway!


----------



## killer b (Apr 15, 2018)

Whatever he used or didn't use, he was still an amazing painter. He still had to apply the paint to the canvas whatever.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> The Vermeer camera obscura theory is just that, a theory. There's no convincing supporting evidence I've seen. He could just have been an amazing painter.



One of the arguments for it is that his portrayal of light and shade is more accurate than should be possibly given the capabilities of the human eye. We do not percieve the brightness of a surface in absolute terms, only relative to other stuff in our field of view. Vermeer's paintings suggest an ability to look at two separate points in a scene and determine which is brighter, something humans can't actually do with any accuracy.


----------



## killer b (Apr 15, 2018)

I've read all the theories ta, I just don't find them that convincing.


----------



## JimW (Apr 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> One of the arguments for it is that his portrayal of light and shade is more accurate than should be possibly given the capabilities of the human eye. We do not percieve the brightness of a surface in absolute terms, only relative to other stuff in our field of view. Vermeer's paintings suggest an ability to look at two separate points in a scene and determine which is brighter, something humans can't actually do with any accuracy.


Mind, we don't see in oils or tempura either, so I reckon he may have been manipulating these images in several ways.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 15, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> The point is that it was Duchamp (and nobody else) who had the idea of taking this everyday object (which he didn't create) and displaying it as a work of art, thereby demanding the viewer to think about not only the validity of the object itself as a piece of art, but also his own validity as an artist, as well as the very notion of what art is and can be. Yes it's absurd, comical and ridiculous, but it's also profound and challenging - and that's why it's an important piece of art. It clearly had quite an effect on you anyway!



Depends if you think the purpose of art is to make a point, or to make a thing that has a point.

But even if it is only about making a point, 'look how clever I am' is a pretty shit point to make.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Apr 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Depends if you think the purpose of art is to make a point, or to make a thing that has a point.
> 
> But even if it is only about making a point, 'look how clever I am' is a pretty shit point to make.


And Duchamp would agree!


----------



## killer b (Apr 15, 2018)

I think that bellends are still calling Duchamp's work shit 100 years on is a tribute to it's excellence tbh. Truly shit art fades into obscurity IME.


----------



## killer b (Apr 15, 2018)

A century of pub bores saying their kid could have done that.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> I think that bellends are still calling Duchamp's work shit 100 years on is a tribute to it's excellence tbh. Truly shit art fades into obscurity IME.



I still think the Armenian genocide was a bad thing, presumably this means it was actually great because of what apparently now passes for logic around here.

_People who don't like x are bellends because they don't like x which is great because bellends don't like it and you can always spot a bellend because they're the ones who don't like x. _


----------



## killer b (Apr 15, 2018)

The... Armenian genocide?


----------



## killer b (Apr 15, 2018)

anyway... this is my new favourite painting. 






Those 17th century dutch guys knew their onions. And their asparagus.


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Apr 15, 2018)

tim said:


> There is only is one contender



I sadly have to report that these murals no longer exist  Someone whitewashed them out after I left Granada. However, they were great fun, lasted a few years and were photographed countless Thousands of times, so they will survive on the internet for as long as the internet survives 

For those who have no idea...

This mural and the Second one (next door) were painted under street light during very hot August nights heavily under the influence of stuffs  I still love them. They were totally free - no idea what was going to happen. 3 Meters x 3 Meters on walls next to the highest court of Southern Spain painted with Two a Penny Chinese acryllics. I was only questioned a single time by police. They realised there was fuck all I was doing illegally and left me alone. Local businesses paid for the paints and brushes (and beers). 90% of people loved them and thanked me very generously.

------------

Cheers for putting me in a thread of such esteem


----------



## RoyReed (Apr 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> The Vermeer camera obscura theory is just that, a theory. There's no convincing supporting evidence I've seen. He could just have been an amazing painter.



Vermeer's Camera

Vermeer expert comments on Bafta-nominated film Tim’s Vermeer

Vermeer's Camera: Uncovering the Truth Behind the Masterpieces

He was an amazing artist and he used a camera - what's the problem. There's absolutely no dichotomy here.


----------



## JimW (Apr 15, 2018)

RoyReed said:


> Vermeer expert comments on Bafta-nominated film Tim’s Vermeer
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Vermeers-Camera-Uncovering-Behind-Masterpieces/dp/0192803026
> 
> He was an amazing artist and he used a camera - what's the problem. There's absolutely no dichotomy here.


That's more "bloke who had the camera theory still sticks by it"


----------



## RoyReed (Apr 15, 2018)

JimW said:


> That's more "bloke who had the camera theory still sticks by it"



I've worked with Phil Steadman. He's much more than a bloke with a theory.


----------



## killer b (Apr 15, 2018)

My problem was stating theory as fact. It's a theory, and while it may have some evidence to support it, it isn't uncontested. I don't think the evidence is strong enough to say it with certainty. 

However he created the paintings, they remain some of the most glorious works of art ever created, and he was a peerless genius.


----------



## JimW (Apr 15, 2018)

RoyReed said:


> I've worked with Phil Steadman. He's much more than a bloke with a theory.


Fair enough, I have no expertise on this at all. Just struck me that he seems the main proponent, though noticed a comment on the Amazon link saying Hockney said similar,


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Apr 15, 2018)

RoyReed said:


> Vermeer expert comments on Bafta-nominated film Tim’s Vermeer
> 
> Vermeer's Camera: Uncovering the Truth Behind the Masterpieces
> 
> He was an amazing artist and he used a camera - what's the problem. There's absolutely no dichotomy here.



When did artists not use technology as it became available? The idea that using a camera in anyway is cheating is total bollocks.

The influence cameras had on composition is probably something worth discussing much more. The viewfinder changed the way many people saw pictures. Before that, most of the scenes presented and replicated were created as a stage. In both cases, the real skill of the artist is to express something beyond technical brilliance.


----------



## RoyReed (Apr 15, 2018)

Stanley Edwards said:


> When did artists not use technology as it became available? The idea that using a camera in anyway is cheating is total bollocks.


Someone once told me that using a ruler was cheating.


----------



## killer b (Apr 15, 2018)

no-one has called it cheating tbf.


----------



## RoyReed (Apr 15, 2018)

That's always the implication of these arguments, though. Hence the curator of the Royal Collection gloating over a drawing of Canaletto's showing perspective construction lines and how that proved he didn't use a camera obscura, when it was reported by his contemporary biographer that he did use one, and his camera obscura is actually on display in the Correr Museum in Venice.


----------



## killer b (Apr 15, 2018)

Not in my argument. I think Vermeer is the greatest painter ever, whatever techniques he used. I just don't think your mate's theory that he used a camera obscura is totally convincing.


----------



## Santino (Apr 16, 2018)

Kenneth Clark mentions the possibility in Civilisation, so it's not even that recent a theory.


----------



## killer b (Apr 16, 2018)

I'm glad we're all agreed it's a theory.


----------



## Santino (Apr 16, 2018)

Yes, like evolution by natural selection.


----------



## killer b (Apr 16, 2018)

Great. Last night I'm compared with a holocaust denier, today I'm a creationist.


----------



## killer b (Apr 16, 2018)

...at least Vermeer had some sense of perspective.

badoom-tish


----------



## rekil (May 15, 2018)

This Jon McNaughton has a chicken in it.



Spoiler


----------



## hash tag (Aug 6, 2019)

Lichtenstein blew me away in the flesh. The exactness appeals to my pedantry and ocd.


----------



## hash tag (Aug 6, 2019)

We saw the Breugal The Younger exhibition recently. Not my fave, but I thought he deserved a mention. You need to see the attention to detail, close up. They are bonkers.


----------

