MCG
  • About
  • PAINTINGS
    • Catskillstyle
    • Fragments 2005-2015
  • Haiku-inspired Poems
  • Aesthetics

Could PICASSO “really” paint? YES…he really could, as the evidence shows.

4/11/2010

6 Comments

 
In my early teenage years, I met a classical realist painter at an art show who talked to me about his work. Being a young lover of Baroque painting and wanting to learn to ‘paint like that', I was enthralled, Here was a living expert who could paint ‘real’ stuff. In the 1970’s, you didn't just bump into people like this every day. His paintings whispered to me “here is someone you can learn from.” I fired off countless questions, and he kindly shared his thoughts. At some point I asked him, “Why did Picasso do things like he did and not like this?” He told me, “Oh, don’t worry about Picasso. He couldn't paint. Not really. That’s why he did all that other stuff.”

I’m sure this gentleman meant no harm. He eagerly shared information with me about traditional painting techniques in the short twenty minutes we spoke. The thing is, I didn't remember a word he told me about those ideas. What I did remember and what echoed in my head for years was the thought that “Picasso couldn’t paint.” I wondered why was he was successful and revered by so many people if what I had been told was true. I didn't dwell on it very long, it was easier to accept the notion that “he just couldn't paint.” 
I assumed that must be a fact because an excellent painter who clearly knew a lot more about painting than I did was telling my young mind it was so. Over the years I've encountered this exact same notion expressed in different ways in the world of figurative painting. Old myths die hard.

Later in my career I was discussing art history with a friend who was an art professor. He was a painter, a teacher, an academic, a thinker. His own training had been a product of mid-20th century art education. Many of his thoughts would be anathema to some of today's painters who pursue naturalistic painting.
​
I pushed him on the subject of Picasso. He explained to me what he thought and knew about Picasso. I didn't understand his adoration for Picasso. We argued about it, and in desperation to feel better about my own direction I blurted out, “Yeah, well, Picasso couldn't really paint!” He looked at me, exasperated, but gently said, “Michael, Picasso was a creative genius.” I thought about that for a long time. After all, we are often told to “learn our craft", master the skills and the tools, and then go forth and create. 

I realized then that in order to understand and develop as an artist it would be necessary to not only learn some craft and learn how to expand my creativity, but to also devote time to the study of art history and it's theories. So I put down my palette, crawled out of my dimly lit studio, and started to read.
Imagine my surprise when I stumbled across Picasso’s early paintings, some of which are shown below. Now I don't place these works on the same technical level for design as a Titian or Bouguereau. Consider the first painting(Picasso's portrait of his mother) which was made in 1896. It is technically stronger than many 'realist' painters work of today, and not as strong as others. But weighing the fact that he was fifteen years old when he painted it, I'll forgive him any artistic weakness the painting might hold.

I've often wondered if Picasso had decided to pursue naturalistic figurative painting to his fullest ability, would he have excelled and matured in that particular expression? We'll never know. Pablo Picasso decided to go in other directions and to explore other visual experiences through form. Truly, he was a creative genius, and he left us many treasures.

Could Picasso 'really' paint? My eyes tell me yes. It's a question easily resolved. Perhaps more interesting questions are: Why did he choose other paths? What was he exploring? What did he find? How can I use the knowledge he uncovered for my own pursuit of visual art?


6 Comments
chris
1/18/2011 04:43:41 pm

I heard a story recently:

A friend of Picasso's came to him and said "Picasso, why do you paint the way you do? Why don't you paint more real?"
Picasso replied "What do you mean 'real'"?
"You know, REAL. For example, take this picture of my wife." The friend said, reaching into his wallet. "like this"
Picasso looks at the photo - "she is a bit small and flat wouldnt you say?"

Reply
Scott
10/28/2012 04:21:31 pm

I have been researching Picasso for a few weeks now for a college Art class and i must say that with the invention of the photograph Picasso had to wonder what was the purpose of art in this new age. Undoubtedly in my eyes he turned to the philosophy of Socrates and Plato and discovered, or re-unearthed, these theories of reality and "Form" and then captured his concept of "Form" in his art. Also choosing the color palette that he did concreted these ideas into the minds of the viewer more firmly than a "standard" color palette would

Reply
MegZ
12/12/2013 04:33:11 am

I, too, used to believe that Picasso 'couldn't paint'. I learned something at his exhibition at the Philadelphia Museum of Art that COMPLETELY changed my mind. Not just seeing his more representative works, but learning the reasoning behind the extra eyes and all that...he was showing the passage of time and movement. What a concept! Instead of painting a model who sat in exactly the same pose through several sessions, he painted this part of her as she looked at him the first day, and that part of her as she looked out the window the next day, and another part as she fell asleep the third day (my interpretation of the explanation as I recall it, anyway). Now I'm a believer :)

Reply
jon
1/7/2014 03:46:56 am

I guess picasso was just bored of painting realistic stuff...cant judge him...

Reply
frank
3/6/2016 03:36:47 pm

picasso's representational work was average at best, compared to the other academic artists of his time. It is too bad he stopped, he had a lot of potential.

Reply
Brian
7/11/2016 09:29:15 pm

I'm not sure he could draw in a realist sense. In a caricature form yes, but realist- perhaps it took too much work.
An analogy of this is the best Russian pianist of the day upon seeing Glenn Gould's Bach Variations performed, commented, "yes I could play as well as him, but it's just too much work ! "

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Picture
    Drunk as a hoot owl,
    writing letters 
    by thunderstorm.
    - Kerouac
     
     

    Musings

    All
    Caravaggio Style
    Cesar Santos Syncretism
    Conundrum Of The Workshops
    Could Picasso Really Draw?
    Petrus Christus Mystery
    Seeing: Molyneaux
    Whistler's Mother: Modern Art
    Why Do We See?
    Winslow Homer Dreams

    connect with michael:

Reach Out
© 2020 MC GUILMET. All Rights Reserved.
  • About
  • PAINTINGS
    • Catskillstyle
    • Fragments 2005-2015
  • Haiku-inspired Poems
  • Aesthetics