‘The object of art…

…is not to reproduce reality but to create a reality of the same intensity.’ That’s what Giacometti said. He could talk the talk as well as, er, walk the walk:

A Giacometti anecdote: the artist refused to take his GP’s advice when, in 1938, a car ran over his foot on the Place de Pyramides. The accident broke several bones, and his doctor urged him to stay off the foot so it would heal properly. He didn’t. The foot didn’t heal properly and Giacometti walked with a limp for the rest of his life.

This is the blog’s first sculpture, I think. Sculpture demands a third dimension, so go round the back of your monitor for the full effect.

Woman Standing, Bronze, 1959

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Are You With Me?, From Working-Class Hero to Absolute Disgrace (A Memoir and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to ‘The object of art…

  1. markelt says:

    Is that anecdote recounted so we think he’s a bit of a tit?

  2. makemeadiva says:

    Maybe it’s recounted because it shows his commitment to creating a foot with the same intensity of the unbroken one.

    There is a Giacometti drawing at the De La Warr exhibition “Modern Times responding to chaos”. I don’t remember the detail unless it was a drawing of pigs in a sack. I liked the “Big Fight” collage.

    The kids were there, they are a distraction from art. Especially when the 8 yo is rubbishing the Jackson Pollock

    “That’s rubbish a baby could do better than that.”

    LOUDLY

    http://www.dlwp.com/WhatsOn/ExhibitionDetail.aspx?EventId=1174

  3. Stephen Foster says:

    “Maybe it’s recounted because it shows his commitment to creating a foot with the same intensity of the unbroken one.”

    Exactly, he walks the limpy walk to back up the unlimping talk.

    Did you explain to the child about the death of representation and Clement Greenberg’s assertion regarding the ineluctable flatness of the canvas?

  4. makemeadiva says:

    Negative Spock – I can’t speak Klingon.

  5. Geraldine says:

    Does that wonderful coloured pole in Berlin not count as sculpture? When is a pole not a pole?

  6. markelt says:

    What is essential is invisble to the eye. Like a hobbled foot in a shoe.

  7. Stephen Foster says:

    That is the most philosophical question this blog has ever had to deal with.

  8. OS says:

    >What is essential is invisble to the eye. Like a hobbled foot in a shoe.

    Or a Pole at the pole? I’m in amaze here and can’t find a way out.

    BB.

  9. George S says:

    The sculpture isn’t walking any walk. It looks irredeemably still.

Comments are closed.