7 Reasons

Tag: Crayons

  • Guest Post: 7 Reasons You Should Have Paid More Attention In Art Class

    Guest Post: 7 Reasons You Should Have Paid More Attention In Art Class

    When I was last at school I treated art lessons as a time to let my hair down, muck around and generally play the class fool. I don’t know what the kids must have thought of me – no wonder I didn’t last long as a teacher.

    7 Reasons You Should Have Paid Attention In Art Class
    Photo by Blue Monkey

    Here are seven good reasons why it really does pay to brush up on your art skills at school.

    1.  Think Of The Money. There is very good money to be made from art. In 1895, Norwegian artist Edvard Munch knocked up a picture of an alien-type figure holding their head in their hands while screaming on a bridge. He called the picture The Scream and it’s just been sold for $119.9 million (£74 million) at auction.

    2.  Anyone Can Come Up With A Great Piece Of Art. Looking at The Scream it’s hard to resist the thought that anyone could have drawn it – the figure in the picture is just one step up from a stick man; Munch hasn’t even troubled himself with the task of giving the screaming figure tricky-to-draw details like hair, eyelashes or fingernails. The Scream shows that a very simple, well-executed idea will take you a long way. And makes you lots of dosh too.

    3.  Making Great Art Can Be Quick. Watching the great children’s TV artists of the 1970s and 1980s go about their work provided a crash-course lesson on how to create great art quickly. Both Rolf Harris and Tony Hart worked at a frightening pace – producing two or three top-notch pieces of work in each half-hour episode. Replicate this work rate over a 9 to 5 working day and you will have lots of interesting art to sell.

    4.  Art College Is The Modern-Day Fame Academy. Britain has a great tradition of people going to Art College going on to become famous stars. John Lennon of The Beatles, Pete Townshend of The Who and Keith Richards of The Rolling Stones were just three of the stars who went to art college to study painting techniques and graphic design. It is worth noting that all of these stars found fame not through painting but through music and that most of the 1960s art colleges have been closed down because of spending cuts but you get the picture.

    5.  People Love Child Artists. Paying attention during primary school art lessons can pay dividends very quickly as the art world is particularly keen to embrace young talent. Nine-year-old Kieron Williamson is a case in point. The Norfolk lad regularly exhibits his oil, watercolour and pastel originals at exhibitions and has been dubbed ‘Mini Monet’ by chin-stroking art experts. “It’s lovely to see a nine-year-old boy keeping traditional landscape painting alive,” Kieron’s mother Michelle recently said. And there’s clearly a market for it – the youngster’s brilliant paintings fetch as much as £150,000 at auction.

    6.  Art Is Self-Expression. What other professions allow you to choose your own hours, attract muses and keep a messy office without the boss telling you off? Being an artist is all about expressing your inner soul and letting your creative fires burn freely.

    7.  Art Opens So Many Doors. And if all else fails you can always become an art teacher.

    Author Bio: James Christie writes for Yellow Moon craft supplies shop.

  • 7 Reasons Pablo Picasso’s La Lecture Is Not Worth £25M

    7 Reasons Pablo Picasso’s La Lecture Is Not Worth £25M

    Last night, Pablo Picasso’s alleged masterpiece, La Lecture, sold at Sotherby’s for just over £25M. Twenty. Five. Million. Pounds. Now, I know art is subjective, but how?! There is so much wrong with it. So much. Let’s start with seven:

    Pablo Picasso's La Lecture

    1.  Lines. Seriously, if I had paid £25M for a painting I would at least expect the artist to be able to draw a straight line. I assume – which given the state of this picture is probably a dangerous thing to do – that the thing behind this girl is a chair. Well what the bloody hell is going on with the top of it? If you struggle to line things up get a ruler. And rulers did exist in 1932. I’ve checked.

    2.  Perspective. This picture would make much more sense if we could only see one half of the girl’s face. Instead of that we have something that clearly inspired the formation of gypsies.

    3.  Nose. Good gracious it’s a big one. Too big I would wager. The bridge of one’s nose usually ends in line with the eyes, this poor girl’s nose ends somewhere at the top of her forehead. Which raises two questions. One, is this an accurate portrayal of the young girl? Two, if it is why on earth wouldn’t Picasso have chosen someone better looking? You may think I am shallow for saying that, but paintings do not have personality. They simply don’t. And anyone who says, “I just adore the personality of this piece,” is a prick.

    4.  Neck. The last time I saw a neck like this, Gladstone Small was playing for England. I am beginning to wonder if Picasso really did like this girl? The big freak.

    5.  Breast. That’s right, just the one. At least I assume it’s supposed to be a breast. It might well be a ring doughnut. Or a bagel. Or perhaps the fire alarm fell off the wall. I know art is supposed to leave something to the imagination, but this takes the biscuit. Ooh, perhaps it’s a Jammie Dodger.

    6.  Time + Materials. I think that is a fair way to establish how much a painting is worth. So let’s have a look at La Lecture. These are only rough calculations, but I would guess the following: Time spent painting = eight minutes. Cost of crayons = £3.49. A brilliant artist could probably get away with charging £2,500/hour. Judging by the above, I would say Picasso could get away with charging £2.50/hour. So I reckon La Lecture is probably worth about £3.82. That’s about £25M less than it sold for. It’s a difficult one to explain to the wife.

    7.  Morals. I question the morality of the buyer here. This painting depicts the image of Marie-Therese Walter, Picasso’s 17 year old extramarital lover. That’s not right. In fact it’s wrong. If Picasso wanted to get his end away with a teenage girl he could at least have had the decency to divorce his wife first. There is no excuse for sleeping behind people’s backs. And, judging by the expression on Walter’s face that is exactly what had happened about five minutes before Picasso whipped out the crayons. By allowing the sale of this painting for £25M what are we saying? It’s okay to sleep around so long as you produce a bunch of distorted lines afterwards? Sad times.