In my previous post, I promised more paintings by Victor Dynnikov.
Why is this Curious Crow good Art?
Read the comments 1-2-3 to understand why.
There’s nothing of interest in the corner into which the crow cornered itself. A less gifted artist would be tempted to paint something above the crow to indicate what the crow is curious about.
In the painting below, the artist couldn’t avoid the decoy of obviousness: he added a butterfly, killing the drama of not knowing what causes the ape’s curiosity. The result is a cute pic, but not really a great artwork:
Back to the Crow: If you are interested in colour conflicts: think about the area occupied by dark, heavy, and light-weight colours and try to figure out why the crow does not tilt the painting. Why is the painting in the perfect balance, while the crow is strained?
Love the painting – and the previous Dynnikov one – the seemingly ease of his handling of colour! I can’t answer the question, but the clue might have to do with the fact that there is not one horizontal line in the composition – it is a play of diagonals and loose verticals – in addition to his mind blowing colour work – even on a computer screen.
You may want to check out Cezanne’s still lifes: he tilts the floor or introduces a “tilting” diagonal or a fold in the draping cloth to achieve the same “balancing” effect )
This Sunday I go to an art gallery that hosts Dynnikov’s heritage for another, closer look at some of his works. Hope to have more images coming )
I know them, yes, though I was not consciously considering them when I was searching for a clue. Are you saying I got it right?
Yes, you got it right )
Reblogged this on Lavender Turquois.
Now, the crow — I like.
It is a good crow, but more expensive than the still life from the previous post )
it’s ok, I am not in the market for that kind of genre/style anyway 😉