←back to thread

27 points apollinaire | 4 comments | | HN request time: 1.164s | source
Show context
ggm ◴[] No.43576657[source]
So let's be clear: it's implicitly incest, right? One denial in this article aside, he appears to have encouraged if not caused his younger sisters eroticism as a pre teen, took her away to share a room in the hotel his parents honeymooned in, changed his art after entering a relationship. Nobody knows who the child's father is, fair enough. His pre marriage art was unquestionably "edgy"

Amazing paintings. Also, amazingly disturbing. I cannot conceive of having one on the wall.

replies(4): >>43611317 #>>43611912 #>>43612477 #>>43613375 #
1. hiddencost ◴[] No.43611912[source]
It's very stark, touring a gallery show of Schiele.

Every single piece is grotesque except that work portraying his sister.

replies(2): >>43612737 #>>43612746 #
2. ◴[] No.43612737[source]
3. paganel ◴[] No.43612746[source]
That's how art is supposed to be, to raise something inside the one experiencing it. For those that want a more mundane experience from the same time-period there's also a Sargent and countless others like him.

For reference, the one Schiele exhibition that I got to attend took place more than 15 years ago, at the Leopold Museum in Vienna itself, and for sure I didn't see it as grotesque. I was more mesmerised later that day by the Egyptian art hosted in the nearby Kunsthistorisches Museum

replies(1): >>43613985 #
4. khazhoux ◴[] No.43613985[source]
I saw that same exhibition in Vienna! 2007 IIRC.

I agree that it never struck me as grotesque. His work is bold, stark, urgent. I also find that his draftsmanship is overshadowed. He has an amazing sense of volume, told with simple linework. And his hand renderings are sublime.