I'llBeLate4That
Pro
Art is subjective for the most part, but talent isn't always how realistic you can depict something, it's about the feeling it's suppose to evoke.
With Basquiat's shyt it's suppose to be ugly and visceral to show the shyt that was going on in his world done in a basic straight to the point, simplistic way.
Warhol was from the school of Rockwell in his more realistic depiction of his subject. He looked at shyt like a soup can and could find an artistic aspect in it by painting it centered with no background where there was nothing else to focus on and helped carry the whole Pop Art movement. I doubt there was any real emotion behind the shyt but just the stark image of something done realistically has an aesthetic beauty to it.
Picasso had his different waves of style but his ability to create an image from a single line was
With Basquiat's shyt it's suppose to be ugly and visceral to show the shyt that was going on in his world done in a basic straight to the point, simplistic way.
Warhol was from the school of Rockwell in his more realistic depiction of his subject. He looked at shyt like a soup can and could find an artistic aspect in it by painting it centered with no background where there was nothing else to focus on and helped carry the whole Pop Art movement. I doubt there was any real emotion behind the shyt but just the stark image of something done realistically has an aesthetic beauty to it.
Picasso had his different waves of style but his ability to create an image from a single line was