PDA

View Full Version : Fuck Salvidor Dali



SicN Twisted
01-01-2005, 04:52 PM
Why are people so enthused by off the rack, assembly line manufactured surrealism without any originality or artistic merit? Avid a dollar was the biggest sellout in art history, for which he was kicked out of the surrealist group. Every painting I've seen of his was simply a watered down corperate version of his counterparts art. Magritte and Max Ernst are completely obscure, but everyone loves avid a dollar. Dali was also an outspoken supporter of fascism, to add insult to injury. Dali = overrated money grubbing whore.

wheelchairman
01-01-2005, 04:53 PM
Agreed. I've always had a special place in my heart for Picasso.

Anya82
01-01-2005, 04:59 PM
I don't care about the money. I like his paintings. I LOVE surrealism
That's what i do. Surrealism rocks cause you can create an universe, a world that doesn't exists, with things that have a shape, but are placed in a way you'll never be able to see in the real world. It's a picture of one's dreams.

HornyPope
01-01-2005, 05:16 PM
I liked Fox' from LIA take on the Salvador Deli sell-out issue.


First of all, the allegation that Dali "sold out" came earlier than the change(s) in style(s), to what is now seen as Dali's commercial art (whatever that is), rather than his Pure Art (whatever that could be).

In 1931 Dali broke away from the Surrealist movement, because he didn't approve of their (unwritten) political rule, that all members had to be devoted communists.

It was at this point that Andre Breton (the leader of the Surrealists) coined the nickname "Avida Dollars" -- an anagram of Salvador Dali -- to denote the idea that Dali "sold out".

That epithet was to follow Dali, and haunt his image, through the rest of his career.

Dali has, by many, been called reactionary (and worse), and that is often claimed as a reason for his leave from the group. But as far as Dali and his art goes, I believe that this quote from 1980 comes closer to the truth:

“Politicising is the worst mistake an artist can make, Nobody knows whether the Venus de Milo was communist or fascist.”

While quoting, I might as well provide another one, that hints at a couple of points with great significance to this topic:

“You have to systematically create confusion – it sets creativity free. Everything that is contradictory creates life.”

It would be quite impossible for an artist with that kind of approach to his art, to stick to his original motif(s), or even to his original, Surrealist (group) style(s), and sources of inspiration.

Furthermore it tells us that Dali deliberately created confusion, in his art, but also about himself, and that he, therefore, was more likely to foster rumours, and even accusations, rather than try to deny them.

A second accusation, of sorts, was added when Dali, in 1958, married Gala. It is often claimed that she "destroyed" Dali as an artist, and, more or less, used him to make as much money as possible.

It is true that Gala took over the business side of things, but Dali was far from a fool, and I find it implausible that she did, or made him do, anything against his will.

For that, and other, reasons, I find it more likely that she actually became his Muse, through, and because of, Love, rather than for money. In other words, I very much doubt that Dali was driven, as an artist, by Gala's, and/or his own greed.

This is not to deny the fact that it was on Gala's initiative that Dali branched out into perfume, advertising and only God ... err ... Gala knows what. But as this, for the most part, was merchandising of existing (pieces and concepts of) art, by Dali, it was of little significance to how he actually used his creative genious -- and time...

Time is a rather important factor here, because most of Dali's later paintings are Huge (with a capital H). In fact so huge that he had a hole through to the second floor in their house, and had to work from both floors when painting. But he painted with minute brushes and in equally minute detail, to perfection. All of which means that each painting took a considerable time to produce. The "merchandise" provided an income meanwhile...

Compare to Christo (also working with his wife, by the way), who spends years to plan and create his installations, that in themselves cannot be sold. Instead he exhibits and sells the sketches and notes, while also selling books and other "merchandise".

But back to Dali and Gala, if only to digress again:

Another, if indirect, reason that I doubt that Gala "destroyed" Dali the artist, is the similarity to the frequent claims that Yoko Ono broke up the Beatles, while fact is that their break up began already in 1967, with the death of Brian Epstein. But the main reason was, of course, that they were -- at least three -- creative guys, who wanted to explore new territory. John Lennon got more and more interested in the avant garde (music as well as other art), and through that he met Yoko Ono. The rest is history for another topic...

I'm afraid I'll have to leave other things, such as Quantum Theory, for a future post...

FoxLeonard

SicN Twisted
01-01-2005, 06:22 PM
Uh, Dali didn't break away from the Surrealist group, he was kicked out. He was unanimously voted out of the surrealist group because he singlehandedly turned surrealism into a commodity. Also, the only part of his painting that were surrealist was shape - the landscapes were reletively empty. Surrealists had commentary on human consciousness in their art, Dali had none, he just had weird clocks.

SicN Twisted
01-02-2005, 02:10 AM
Dali also admitted his paintings were so huge because bigger painting produce higher revenues.

HornyPope
01-02-2005, 02:51 AM
I wouldn't know enough about Dali, surealism or arts to form a compelling argument concerning the sell out issue so I wont, but your last argument transcends common sense and I have to react to that; moreover, it only streghtens the opinion of Fox, who is a very respect person in my books, who said that Dali had intentionaly created confusion for his work. Do you honestly think larger paintings produce more revenues? That's idiotic. The cost of art has never been measured by the volume. If Dali had indeed said that, he was either a) kidding b) intentionaly trying to mislead the public c) sarcasticly fighting back those who accuse him of selling out d) all of the above.

Sunny
01-02-2005, 07:33 AM
It's "Avida Dollars", love. I fail to see why everyone thinks Breton is so brilliant for coming up with that nickname.

You keep pointing out that he was greedy, as if that made him any less talented. He might've been the greediest person on Earth, but the colors, shadow and light in his paintings amaze me. Surrealist or not, sellout or not. Get over "The persistence of memory" and look into his other paintings. There is far more to see than "weird clocks", believe me.

For the record, I like Magritte, Ernst and de Chirico more than I like Dali, but it has little to do with the fact that he was a "sellout". I am amazed by some people's inability to appreciate visual art or music only because it happened to have achieved commercial success.

And while I appreciate your attempts at sounding authoritative, I don't think you're in any position to judge whether Dali's paintings were void of artistic merit. You might not find them aesthetically pleasing, and you might not have any respect for the painter himself, but making such a claim is going a little too far.

Subsidal
01-02-2005, 07:37 AM
I'm not really into that art thingy, but I like this clocks by Dali

SicN Twisted
01-02-2005, 01:45 PM
Never. Sunny can vouch for the fact that I've always hated it. For the record, it's not simply because he sold out, it's because I don't like his art, and I think the reason his art sucks has alot to do with him selling out, because money is not as powerful a motivations as "understanding your dreams" and "becoming war and peace" and more of Breton's self styles missions. Dali's art was made with an off the rack color scheme - I don't think he chose his colors with any originality, because their blends didn't impress me. His landscapes are cool to look at, but compared to artists like even Goya and Miro, who I don't like that much, he was just empty.

He may have liked creating confusion, but there was a point he admittedly based his stylistic desisions on how much money he made. Many good artists have unfortunately gone this way, Andy Warhole being one of them. I think most of them started to turn shitty as greed encompassed them, and it's no coincidence.

SicN Twisted
01-02-2005, 08:27 PM
I like that movie, but it was all Bunuel. All Dali did was contribute a few ideas.

SicN Twisted
01-02-2005, 10:10 PM
Says the one with a pink mohawk.

DirtyMagical
01-03-2005, 09:17 AM
He may have liked creating confusion, but there was a point he admittedly based his stylistic desisions on how much money he made. Many good artists have unfortunately gone this way, Andy Warhole being one of them. I think most of them started to turn shitty as greed encompassed them, and it's no coincidence.

Andy didn't just get greedy after some point. His goal in life was to become rich. And he did.

HeadAroundU
01-13-2007, 08:20 AM
Bump because I have fallen in love with Salvador Dali's painting called The Architectural Angelus of Millet from 1933. Some time ago, when I was sitting at the doctor's waiting room I saw him on the wall. I can stare at it all day. I already downloaded a package of 1000 Dali's paintings off eMule. I can say that I like them, some are kinda shocking which is hard to accept for me but I guess I need to get used to it.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y33/HeadAroundU/SalvadorDali-TheArchitecturalAngelu.jpg

H1T_That
01-13-2007, 08:22 AM
I already downloaded a package of 1000 Dali's paintings off eMule. I

Holy fuck, i didn't know he had that many.

JohnnyNemesis
01-13-2007, 08:55 AM
Bumping this thread without mentioning the clitoris? (http://www.the-clitoris.com/f_html/qa_1/qa1_4.htm) Blasphemy!