No rant

[Henri Michaux]

Don's mail about John Garvin investing money in
lithographs is silly!

John Garvin wrote:

>2. John Garvin says that anyone who believes that 27
>years of a great artist's work should be forgotten is
>arrogant and ignorant.

Why would that be arrogant? Just because it's Carl
Barks, is it necessarily good?
Don't misunderstand me. I know Barks comics by heart -
and cannot say how much I like them. I have read all
of them over and over again.
I have seen his paintings at two exhibitions. I love
Matisse, Derain, and many other painters. I like Pop
artists as well. I love Marcel Duchamp. And I think
that yes, Barks' paintings are very uninteresting. I
love Barks' stories because they are so simple and the
storytelling so obvious in a way. The paintings are
missing simplicity which is one of the great forces of
Barks' comics. 

Almost everyone think that Voltaire's theater should
be forgotten. Appolinaire, Rimbaud and even William
Faulkner did poor works, and the fact that they spend
2, 5 or 75 years on this doesn't change a thing.



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/