Afterwords for Fred Ross by Giacomo

Let me be very clear: I am not opposed to 19th century art, not to Bouguereau, Cabanel or my fellow countryman Alma Tadema. I enjoy their work as much as the next person or anyone at Art Renewal.

I am opposed to the way these artists are represented in writings by members of Art Renewal on their website and elsewhere.
Saying that the representational skills of a painter are responsible for the quality of the work is like saying that the pianist who can play scales the fastest is the best musician. Skill as a painter is only a means to achieve a goal that is in art, it is not the goal itself.
Creating the image of a century where artists only drop blobs of paint on poorly grounded canvas is a grave insult to the artists of the 20th century, and to the critics and theorists, and to collectors who have bought works of art. Besides: there are 20th century artists whose technical skills are equal to -or higher than- the mentioned 19th century academic painters; to restrict the list to artists of my native country: Carel Willink, Raoul Hynckes, Edgar Fernhout etc. I think that the 20th century raised more realists than abstract painters.
Saying that modern artists do not have technical skills is wrong. For instance Picasso could paint technically like any 19th century Pompier. He chose not to use that skill in his work after 1908.
Saying that the ‘blobthrowing’ artists are in conspiracy against other forms of art is not only wrong but also very insulting. Using fallacies to ‘prove’ these points is morally unjust.