Knowledge runs down.

Perhaps it was inevitable I would start studying art. After all, my obsession with manifestos began with feminist claims, but many of the most famous are art treaties.

And I am OBSESSED. Or hyperfixated or whatever.

I was looking up artists from different movements on arthistoryproject.com and really impressed with myself at how I could see connections and one artist was already reminding me of another. Even with my limited knowledge!

Artists I liked: – Ferdinand Hodler (Symbolist movement) (late 1800s) – Zinaida Serebriakova (Symbolist movement) (Ukraine) (early 1900s) – Nicholas Roerich (Symbolist movement) (Russia) (early 1900s) – Modigliani (Expressionist movement) (Italy/France) (early 1900s)

Hodler pros: – humorous and expressive face in Night (1890) – color and kind of pointillism on the face in portraits of Giulia Leonardi (1920)

Serebriakova pros: – Self-portrait at the dressing table (1909) the facial expression, activity, the whole thing. AND THE TEXTURE – Ballerinas in the dressing room (1923) – it’s impossible to paint ballerinas without referencing Degas so good job to Degas for that immortality move. But I like how unidealized the movements are and how busty/pin-up-y they look compared to the less detailed more gestural Degas dancers. Look like women and they look strong rather than delicate. The way the dancer is walking away looks totally true to life and not idealized. – Women showing intimacy in women-centric places in ways men cannot – hell yeah

Roerich: – absolutely bonkers colors and scenery – very stealing from other cultures tho…

Love and incomplete admiration, Jordie