Who was Renoir's lover in "Luncheon of the Boating Party"?

[The_Metatron]

Guess Who Renoir Was In Love With In 'Luncheon Of The Boating Party'

I had no idea. What a cool story behind this painting.

[Animavore]

I thought the answer was going to be "Your (generic, not your mom, Meta) Mom".

Exit: It IS interesting though.

[The_Metatron]

Here's the one I chose:

PRIME_BBCODE_SPOILER_SHOW PRIME_BBCODE_SPOILER: my guess

I thought it was the girl leaning on the rail. It appears that she is looking at the fellow in the foreground on the right from afar with great interest. I don't think Renoir painted himself into this painting. It could be the girl on the rail is speaking to the fellow in the dark brown bowler, though.

[Animavore]

[quote="The_Metatron";p="2592189"]Here's the one I chose:

PRIME_BBCODE_SPOILER_SHOW PRIME_BBCODE_SPOILER: my guess

I thought it was the girl leaning on the rail. It appears that she is looking at the fellow in the foreground on the right from afar with great interest. I don't think Renoir painted himself into this painting. It could be the girl on the rail is speaking to the fellow in the dark brown bowler, though.

[/quote]

I thought her too!

[pelfdaddy]

I guessed the dude on the right wearing the sweater.

[zulumoose]

you wouldn't ever be in any doubt which figure he was in love with

Really? Maybe an avid art student would see something the rest of us can't, but I think that statement is a bit of a stretch, a kind of hindsight 20/20 comment.

[aban57]

Never understood why, but paintings never worked on me. Especially abstract ones. This one is pretty impressive technically, very detailed, and yet makes me feel nothing.

[zulumoose]

Paintings, and especially charcoal or pencil drawings, can stir up feelings in me. It is very context sensitive though. I can see something remarkable in a painting one day, then go back to see it again and wonder what it was that impressed me.

I own one piece of art, a print of a colour chalk drawing of a runner. I have always looked at it and been able to connect with the feeling I get on a really good run, when I am fit and feel like I can go on forever.

I had the bottom trimmed to get rid of the text, something like this should not be captioned.

[felltoearth]

Very cool story.

[The_Metatron]

you wouldn't ever be in any doubt which figure he was in love with

Really? Maybe an avid art student would see something the rest of us can't, but I think that statement is a bit of a stretch, a kind of hindsight 20/20 comment.

I though that, also.

I tend to take the idea a bit further, internally. I have long thought that if I need to take a class, or in any way have to try to figure out what the artist meant when he wrote/sculpted/painted/.../composed/.../ , that artist failed.


Sent from my completely solar powered iPad using Tapatalk

[zulumoose]

I have long thought that if I need to take a class, or in any way have to try to figure out what the artist meant when he wrote/sculpted/painted/.../composed/.../ , that artist failed.

I disagree there. You are assuming the artist wanted to reach the general public. Art is often commissioned for a specific audience, or intended to be sold to a niche group. After all, you only have one original painting/sculpture etc to sell.

Ideally all art should reach everyone, but there is a reason novels that are bestsellers are not set works in school. To cater to the widest audience you have to drop to a lowest common denominator level, and sacrifice your abilities, if you are on a higher level. If something is "deep" it means Joe Soap can't see it, otherwise nothing would be.

That said, I do think much of art is false and overrated. A really well written novel is appreciated by the educated and there is usually agreement, not so much with paintings, and I suspect that if you sneak a glass of cheap wine into a blind taste test, some experts will rate it as among the best. Some things just lend themselves to over-interpretation.