At 9/8/09 10:31 PM, Bolo wrote:
Munch is so conventional and indicative of his time period. Not to belittle him or your taste for him, but if you've seen one expressionist piece of art, you've seen them all. While he's not a bad artist per se, I find his treatment of space and perspective to be amateurish, even if precision was not his aim, I feel like, you know, he could have at least made an attempt.
Different artistic movements bring different priorities into the art. Many expressionists, Munch included, didn't seek to portray a faithful adaption of any landscape or item, but elicit an immediate emotional reaction, so thought put into the virtual geography of a piece took a backseat to the mix of color and shapes.
And about expressionists producing similar art, I can see that, but to throw in my two cents I'll say that I visited a mansion that served as an enclave for impressionists and expressionists in the late 1800s in northern Connecticut, and none of the art looked like any of the stuff Monet, Munch or other Europeans in that movement put out, so it could be a cultural thing.