Dalì "vs" De Chirico
 

express your opinions with a vote or a post, thanks.

I disapprove of this thread and honestly you should be ashamed of yourself. A grown man still obsessed over dinosaurs. Why have you not graduated to the world of astronomy? Is that not where most boys look to after their fascination with large non-existent lizards? The final frontier of space? Really. Grow. Up.

Giorgio De Chirico is my all time favorite artist, so...




Yes.

daaaaaaaaaaallllllllllllliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!!

we have a signed and numbered Dali hanging up in our house!

are we doin' it right?


(although I wouldn't say that either the wife or I have been "into" dali for quite some time. the interest wanes proportionate to the lack of hallucinogens.)

De Chirico by a gazillion. Dali was an alright artist, quite talented. But an egoist and massive jerk. Like Picasso. Picasso probably had a bigger weiner tho.

So, yes. De Chirico, by personality.

dali was a mindfuck, and for that he gets the win


dechirico was a lonely bastard, painting the existential existance of his times, as he saw it.

dali was purposefully paranoid and slipping into insanity to create new ways of seeing and ideas and new images and thoughts

both are cool, but dechirico has a lot more boring paintings (in my opinion of course)

...also known as "Avida Dollars"

de Chirico is a bunch of this bullshit





fucking boring after you've seen a dozen or so.
endless exteriors that look like painted (shittyly) hollywood soundstage backdrops for B movies, filled with fucking still life components and architectural details. does nothing for me. even his painting technique is just ok. It is surrealism as if painted by a precocious 11 year old. very static, very inert.

Now, Dali' , for all his failings and fucked upness and assholeness, pained shit like this



works filled with action and lush sensuality, works which are actually quite small and therefore even more insane in their hyperrealistic execution. Looking at the fanatical detail achieved by dali in his works it is almost unthinkable (from a painter's point of view) how insanely difficult they are to achieve.

Dechirico is second rate.

How bizarre you made this poll. I went into my favourite art book store yesterday, just before I've had an epic chat with Sir Melly about 'stuff', and I was reading through a book of collected interviews with Andy Warhol where he's asked what he thinks about Dali claiming to have invented pop art. His answer was ''Maybe he's right, but it's hard understanding what he says half the time''. De Chirico, even though I like some of Dali's work.Dali was incredibly rubbish at creating any sort of mystique about his work because he was a media-whore par excellence.

Dalí, Angelus de Millet...increible and theory

Which bookshop is that?

I voted De Chirico, by the way.

don't judge the artwork by the personality of the artist. that would discount most every artist ever in some respect.

Dali was making people trip out decades before hallucinogens hit the underground's consciousness, much less the mainstreeam. for that I love him.

Koenig Books on Charing Cross Road. I've had the time to go through the Sensational Fix book too, they have 4 copies on sale. I can't afford it, even at £ 58.00 DAMNIT!!

That's obviously true. However while I'll admit that Dali has been sort of trivialised as an artist by the hugeness of his personality I still think De Chirico was the better painter.

I don't, since I just happen to love De Chirico's work, and I feel mostly indifferent about Dali's.

That's actually one of my favourite paintings.

The Delights of the Poet , 1913.

It's meant to have been one of Fellini's inspirations when he was making La Dolce Vita.

you are so slanderous when you disagree.

Thanks for posting that. I LOVE that painting, one of the best ever.

You have to overlook Rob. He is often wrong about things. Occasionally, he'll admit when he's wrong but he's usually too busy flying off the handle and insulting everything a lot. Which is funny, it adds to his style, but admittingly it's hard to take a few things he says seriously, especially in this case...

THOUGH, in this case, it's just an opinion, and opinions technically can't be "wrong"... Art and taste are subjective, of course... and you like what you like... but to call a De Chirico painting "boring" would suggest that he doesn't know much about art in general. But again, you like what you like.

I'd like to meet an 11 year old who could be that "surreal" btw. Sounds like one kick ass 11 year old!!!!!! (speaking of which, anyone can see that documentary My Kid Could Paint That?)

Giorgio De Chirico, both in his artwork and as an artist.

I don't think it necessarily suggests that. It can also suggest that Rob doesn't know much about art, or that it isn't about knowledge at all but instead just empathy. What particularly is boring about it? Is boredom induced by the painting or is it a reflective act by the observer? This is the kind of internal dialogue that comes from making sense of surrealist art. To just write off something as "boring" without further explanation, as Rob did, really says nothing about the paintings themselves.

Waiting for Rob to respond with something along the lines of:

"no I UNDERSTAND the ART
and why SOME BORING ass fuckers think its important
but FUCK THEM
all I know
when I look at most of DeChirico's paintings
is it looks like FUCKING BORING ASS GARBAGE
for pretentious fuckers

sorry to offend you intellectual CRITICS who don't understand the difference between whats beautiful and whats MUNDANE but fuck it

dali wins FUCK"

It's a move where you get teabagged by your opponent to throw a hershey kiss that turns into a blue pop rock before coming down and hitting them with a lp on the way down, to which I recall, was first seen used by Sanford in his Super Marvel Crack Hour videos but prolly went on to use better tactics (Shaded just made it seem like it was HiS move).

what date is this one?
Use of decalcomania as underpainting, just makes me think of Ernst. Another far more interesting surrealist imho. I think Picabia would have been my favourite, if he had been more epic.

I have a double BFA Bachelor's of Fine Art degree in Studio Art (focus on oil painting) and Art History (focus on 20th century painting).

shut yr yapppps

and deChirico is boring. He is the pink floyd to dali's Butthole Surfers

Rob, for some reason, you are the very last person I'd expect to have gone to art school! That's cool.

I am artsy fartsy, and of course, any statements I make about dechirico are purely subjective personal opinion. the man deserves his place in the canon, but I consider him a second rate surrealist. I am not too big a fan of Miro either.
I dig ernst, Dali, and shit but mostly I prefer the Dadaists to the surrealists.

DADA
"there is no beginning and we do not tremble, we are not sentimental. We are a furious Wind, tearing the dirty linen of clouds and prayers, preparing the great spectacle of disaster, fire, decomposition. We will put an end to mourning and replace tears by sirens screeching from one continent to another. Pavilions of intense joy and widowers with the sadness of poison. Dada is real poetry".

Swans Reflecting Elephants, Dali, 1937.
You think surrealists had epic questions?

I saw that. It was just an interesting story at first, and then it got crazy when they brought into question whether or not she actually did the paintings, or if her dad was doing them.

I saw that flick.

this is what Pablo picasso was painting whe he was 13

This just in: Impregnated goat gives birth to a notion, notion irritates nation. Societal rug pulled out from nation's mental feet with metaphorical union.

from the girl (supposedly) in My Kid Could Paint That


I could have farted that out my asshole when I was 4 years old.

I can't remember it all too well, but was that one that she supposedly did, or is that one that they watched her do and she didn't do well because she was being watched?