everybody's an art critic
SRoweCanoe at aol.com
Tue Jun 12 12:56:44 CEST 2001
In a message dated 6/11/2001 10:41:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
dcml-request at stp.ling.uu.se writes:
> <<This was not an unsolicited argument. You solicited the argument when you
> expressed an opinion that Barks should not be remembered
> for his paintings. I stand by my assertion that anyone who feels this way
> has not bothered to examine the fully body of Barks work
> from this period, making them ignorant>>
I've seen many reproductions of Barks' paintings...
Isn't it enough that the man was a genius of comic book art and story?
Why try to insist that everything he did was great?
His paintings are not great.
Further, I don't believe Barks ever claimed they were great.
Indeed, I feel sure that he knew people were buying them for his name and the
subject matter - which is why he switched from other subjects to just ducks.
To say that Barks is not a world class painter is NOT an insult to Barks.
If you like them, fine, it's your money, your taste. But to insist that
Barks will be remembered as a painter - (by anyone other than Disney Duck
fans) is a bit much...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the DCML