| eee

Its main contribution in my estimation is
in the field of Poster Design, carrying a
certain amount of “shock value’, so valu-
able to the art of the Poster. But what
am I saying? Surely Picasso is not to
be confused with Commercial Art. © But
now that we are in the Commercial World
could it be possible that present condi-
tions make for a dealer's exploitation? In
this atmosphere a premium is put on
idea, as distinct from craftsmanship, parti-
cularly the sort of ideas that lend them-
selves to “stunting”. The cry, backed by
the Commercial Opportunists, is always
for ‘some new things’. Can this be one
of the reasons for Picasso's Notoriety?

Now we must come to Picasso's latest
period, -based on the axiom of Cezanne,
“All forms in nature create the sensation
of revolving upon themselves.” Not con-
tent with suggesting the sensation, Picasso
tries to realize it, with the result that he
seems to be painting. a thing in two
places at the same time. For example,
"Girl With a Cock’’ and ‘Guernica’. The
latter is Picasso’s mural protesting the
bombing of the village of Guernica by
Franco, in the Spanish Civil War.

PRO.

By JIM JOHNSON

Since the introduction of Pablo Picasso
to the art world in the early 20th century
there has been more divided opinion in
art lovers, artists and critics than at almost
any other time in the history of art.

As 1947 Vancouver has seen the devel-
opment of a festive occasion honouring the
artist Pablo Picasso, and because this
annual needs writings which will arouse
readers to the extent of testing their own
likes and dislikes, Mr. Alexander and my-
self are endeavouring to give two sides—
two viewpoints—to this great painter.

Mr. Alexander has written voicing his
objections to the art of Picasso and I am
now to answer by objecting to his objec-
tions. I shall follow his article in order
to ease the reader's difficulty in assem-
bling contrary ideas for comparison.

First I would say, however, that Pablo
Picasso must be acknowledged as a pro-
ducer of. great volumes of artistic effort

‘and a life’s work, always a good argu-
ment, for the sincerity and effort of any

poet, painter’ or musician. ~

Mr. Alexander staies that he does ‘not
understand the Spanish artist's work. I
should imagine that this is Mr. Alexander's
fault, just as it is my fault if I fail to
understand the theories of magnetism
through lack of study. I am afraid that
most of our population is wearing the
same pair of shoes as Mr. Alexander.

Although I appreciate the sympathy
that must have prompted Picasso to paint
this large work, I cannot agree that it is
valid as propaganda. In the first place to
function as propaganda, it must be clearly
understood by the Layman. Must he
wade through volumes to find out what
is going on? The answer is “no”. The
average man has not the time or the in-
clination to discover Picasso's reasons for
treating it in this manner.

If it has failed as propaganda, then let
us look at it as Art. Picasso has assumed
that the spectator being a visitor from an-
other planet has only seen one side of a
girl, one side of a horse or bull, but he
has not seen both sides of any of. these
creatures. So being very eager to let him
know that there is another side, he pulls
the other side around placing it beside
what we can already see, proving that
there is more to this than meets the eye.

Personally, I resent this attitude of being _

considered a Tourist from Venus, and I
don't have to be reminded that there is
always the other side of the bull’ Should
anyone argue that he uses this as a decor-

My inclinations are toward a material-
istic conception of history and therefore I
sympathize with Mr. Alexander when he
tries to read the writings of men who
compared to Picasso are mere hangers-on.
Understanding of any art does not come
in a literal manner. Such a painter as
Renoir has said that art is not to be
explained in words. Renoir is easy to
look at, yet he does not expect to be
understood in so many words. Picasso,
though not so representational as Renoir
on the surface, has many abstract qualities
in common with Renoir and it is the ab-
stract which has the power to make an
artist great or small.

Absiraction and simplification from the
visible world is the effort of art, and
Picasso in his cubistic period affords a
simplification of the human figure and the
still-life which Mr. Alexander unlearnedly
classifies as irrevelant.

In the same unlearned manner he com-
pares the experiments of Picasso with
kindergarten projects. Picasso's experi-
ments in “papier-colle’ in the mind of his
great. friend, Gertrude Stein, are efforts
to bring to the surface of the paint-

' ing such realism in texture as ‘had never

before existed. At times a bit of news-
print or wood glued to the oil surface
would serve the purposé of the catalyst
in chemistry—the purpose of mustard, egg-
shell and salt in coffee—to clarify the
effect that the large mass has on the
senses.

ative aid, I would answer that his art is
not intended as decoration.

' Now some of you by this time must’be
thinking that I am looking at these paint-
ing purely as faithful copies of girls, bulls,
guitars, etc. In order to see them as
forms intensified for dramatic effect, let

‘us look at the horse in ‘Guernica’. Now

instead of looking at a wounded shrieking
animal, we are looking at a puzzling dis-
tortion. It has lost its effect in this eccen-
tric treatment. All the impact of the beast
in torment has been forfeited in our search
to identify it. Let us ask ourselves these
questions. Can ketchup take the place of
blood in convincing us that murder has
been committed? Or can eccentric form
take the place of realism in this issue?

In conclusion, I would like to say that
any fool can attack a work or works of
Art, through misunderstanding, but that is
not my intention. My intention is to pro-
voke argument for the sake of clearing up
any misunderstanding on my part. If I
can be convinced of the validity of his
works, my purpose in writing this criti-
cism will be fulfilled. :

Chemistry and physics, the effect of
emerald green on alizarin crimson, the
theory of colours, photography, fashion
drawing, war; all of these things are at
the disposal of the world’s population
with the exception of a minority of real
primitives. These sciences and all phases
of life are, to the educated, influences in
the arts; anything we contact or experi-
ence can be interpreted by painters in any

-manner they feel. free to attempt. No

criticism can logically be lodged against
an artist because of the manner in which
he chooses to express himself, be it de-
sign in flat oriental manner, or cave paint-
ing in cro-magnon manner.

Any sane citizen who can conceive an
argument against art of any kind is not
expending the full capacity of his grey

- matter and consequently the whole idea

of arguing about Picasso, or Rubens, is a
stupidity which only a Simian race could
conceive of.

To argue against an artist who main-
tains that he is sincere is surely the worst
kind of “looking the gift horse in the
mouth", and besides is a waste of precious ~
time. I am wasting valuable time writ-
ing this in order to fill the pages of a
magazine which is the product of a school?
that praises Picasso,. but wastes precious-
time organizing balls and magazines, time
that could be spent painting and discover-
ing new thousands of experiences in art
which surely have not been experienced
as yet. It seems to be a human trait to
do all these things so I shall write no
more.