From: Emily
Category: Art
Date: 23 March 2005
Lee Miller was a bit of a glamour kitten, this doesn't make her work any less meaning full. So she took a lot of portraits of the balding Picasso, why not!? someone had too. Where would all the photographs we have of said Mr Picasso come from. Is he not one of the most important artists of the twentieth century? you might not like his work, infact I personally think a lot of it is not that wonderful, yet and the same time he was a innovator and he has influenced art today. And perhaps this exibition does seem the "who's who" of their era. I thought is was pretty amazing. Okay perhaps it may seem a little unusual that they sat round semi naked while chewing on a bagette. Personally it doesn't offend me. It seems pretty amaxing, that actually hippies started with the artists a decade or two before.
You think the internet is sufficant to look at the image of icons of past and present generations. Right small problem you have to know all their names in order to find them numb-nuts, one of the main aims of any artist is too inform and educate! This may have seemed like it was a selection of photographs of famous people, it was! These people shaped the modern art world. They are icons.
Plus this (The National) is a free gallery, anyone can walk in and stare at the faces of hereos, artists, rock and roll stars, political movers and shakers. Not to mention that they hold countless competitions for all to enter each and every year. So while you slate the National Portrait Gallery perhaps spare a thought all the merit it holds for the rest of us.
[_shared_elements/comment_on_this_review.htm]