Real News. Real Funny.

Comments

  • Which dress was the one she wore on that fateful night she crossed the Rio Grande?
  • Posted by someone who looks like an unbaked roll?
  • There's something strangely attractive and sexy about her. Probably the deformities...
  • I have a few questions I mustache about this wardrobe.
  • i.dailymail.co.ukView Full Size


    Kinky...

    ...oh yeah, polio and back injury. 

    Still ya gotta wonder about the industry that had the skill to make something like this.
  • Oznog: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 306x423]

    Kinky...

    ...oh yeah, polio and back injury. 

    Still ya gotta wonder about the industry that had the skill to make something like this.


    And why they would attach a wooden dildo to her chest
  • AverageAmericanGuy: There's something strangely attractive and sexy about her. Probably the deformities...


    It's her strenth and her attitude.

    /good one subs
  • This must be great news for culturally sensitive rich white women, gay Hispanics, and graffiti "artists" from all over California. Everyone else knows that she would be a footnote in artistic history if it wasn't for her relationship with the Yankees All-Star closer Mariano Rivera.
  • Excellent headline. I brow to subby
  • The All-Powerful Atheismo: Oznog: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 306x423]

    Kinky...

    ...oh yeah, polio and back injury. 

    Still ya gotta wonder about the industry that had the skill to make something like this.

    And why they would attach a wooden dildo to her chest


    That's just a wooden toilet roll holder.
  • i.dailymail.co.ukView Full Size


    Her bourgeois jewelry makes her look like a hypocrite to me. I would have expected a dedicated commie to live by their philosophy.  Or is that just for the "little people"?
  • Gotta ask, why is she more interesting than any other surrealist artist?

    With most of the other ones, you have bits and pieces of their lives, but generally their whole lives are not treated as so important contextually. O'Keefe, Picasso, Warhol, Pollock. Their lives are important, but not more iconic then the art.

    With her the cult of personality seems almost more important then the art.
  • Enemabag Jones: Gotta ask, why is she more interesting than any other surrealist artist?


    Because politics.
  • That's a handsome woman
  • Enemabag Jones: With most of the other ones, you have bits and pieces of their lives, but generally their whole lives are not treated as so important contextually. O'Keefe, Picasso, Warhol, Pollock. Their lives are important, but not more iconic then the art.

    With her the cult of personality seems almost more important then the art.


    You've just proven that you don't know much about the artists you mention. O'Keefe had the same sort of cult of personality going twenty-thirty years ago that Kahlo had a decade ago. You can't understand Picasso at all unless you know his life, as every painting is a coded autobiography (any half-decent Picasso expert can tell you who he was sleeping with when he painted any work just by looking at it). Warhol is huge at the moment and used as justification for everything anyone wants to do today (though people tend to ignore his personal life outside of the Factory, which is sad), and Pollock wouldn't be famous at all if he hadn't had a Hemingway-like mythos built around him both while he was alive and after he (fortunately for all concerned) took himself out of the picture right when he was starting to get fat, drunk and boring.
  • Dwight_Yeast: Enemabag Jones: With most of the other ones, you have bits and pieces of their lives, but generally their whole lives are not treated as so important contextually. O'Keefe, Picasso, Warhol, Pollock. Their lives are important, but not more iconic then the art.

    With her the cult of personality seems almost more important then the art.

    You've just proven that you don't know much about the artists you mention. O'Keefe had the same sort of cult of personality going twenty-thirty years ago that Kahlo had a decade ago. You can't understand Picasso at all unless you know his life, as every painting is a coded autobiography (any half-decent Picasso expert can tell you who he was sleeping with when he painted any work just by looking at it). Warhol is huge at the moment and used as justification for everything anyone wants to do today (though people tend to ignore his personal life outside of the Factory, which is sad), and Pollock wouldn't be famous at all if he hadn't had a Hemingway-like mythos built around him both while he was alive and after he (fortunately for all concerned) took himself out of the picture right when he was starting to get fat, drunk and boring.


    Yeah, but they mostly had talent, so it was semi-justified. Unlike Kahlo.
  • Dwight_Yeast
    Enemabag Jones: With most of the other ones, you have bits and pieces of their lives, but generally their whole lives are not treated as so important contextually. O'Keefe, Picasso, Warhol, Pollock. Their lives are important, but not more iconic then the art.
    With her the cult of personality seems almost more important then the art.
    You've just proven that you don't know much about the artists you mention. O'Keefe had the same sort of cult of personality going twenty-thirty years ago that Kahlo had a decade ago. You can't understand Picasso at all unless you know his life, as every painting is a coded autobiography (any half-decent Picasso expert can tell you who he was sleeping with when he painted any work just by looking at it). Warhol is huge at the moment and used as justification for everything anyone wants to do today (though people tend to ignore his personal life outside of the Factory, which is sad), and Pollock wouldn't be famous at all if he hadn't had a Hemingway-like mythos built around him both while he was alive and after he (fortunately for all concerned) took himself out of the picture right when he was starting to get fat, drunk and boring.


    You are right, I am no art major. When I imagine Picasso, I see the different point of view in one painting. I see vaginas with O'Keefe. I see soup cans with Warhol.

    When I think of Kahlo all I think of are goofy self-portraits and some tragic lifetime storyline that is all about personality and not about the paintings themselves.

    /Or maybe as you are pointing to she may be overhyped recently.
  • Nicely played, Subby. That'll definitely get you a nod for Hairline of the Week.
  • Ryker's Peninsula: This must be great news for culturally sensitive rich white women, gay Hispanics, and graffiti "artists" from all over California. Everyone else knows that she would be a footnote in artistic history if it wasn't for her relationship with the Yankees All-Star closer Mariano Rivera.


    Allllllmost had me there. Nice craftsmanship, not something you see every day. Thanks!

    Kahlo is a genuine artistic screwball. Most of the artists mentioned here were so far out of control that it wasn't funny and in fact in some cases resulted in their deaths. She however just kept chuggin' along.
    Kahlo took out of fashion and derided "peasant art" and elevated it to "Fine Art". No doubt her political leanings helped her "discover" and define the work she did. Which brings into play the dichotomy of her political philosophy versus the jewelry issue mentioned earlier.
    Tough woman. I've wondered why she chose to stay on the ride all the way to the end. I'd have given up and bailed far earlier. To get a better understanding of her and her work you need far more than a few images and a short video on the innertubes. You want to understand the political climate, her love life, and where she came from.
    Oh and, though not a fan of her work, it would be nice to see the exhibit.
    that's all I got.
  • Load 11 of 11 newer comments

This thread is closed to new comments.