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.