The most obvious contrast between these two paintings is their use of color.
The Monet is famously a great use of color. There's a gradient, all the colors really stand out, and it looks realistic.
The paint is noticeable on it, which is probably intentional, though it's hard to say about people painting back then. I guess this painting was a big deal because it contrasted with some of the war scenes or whatever people were painting, but the one big complaint I have with this is it's just a very dull painting of some water and flowers. It's no Dali, that's for sure!
As for Hitler's painting, the tree is drawn really well, but the color looks like a 7 year-old's paint-by-number book. I don't think the white spots are on purpose.
There's a suggestion of people on a bridge, but the coloring is so bad that it makes them look like they're having a bonfire, though perhaps that was an accident. There's no gradient in this color at all, it's just solids and white splotches in between.
It's ridiculous to think that Hitler painted this when he was 37. It's like a hobby painting, someone who does paintings in their spare time. He applied to art school, though! He should be capable of more! Shame on you, Hitler, shame on you!
We'll give this Hitler painting one mustache
and this Monet
No comments:
Post a Comment