Cubism and Discovery

I am not necessarily a fan of Cubism. It’s more that I don’t understand Cubism, let alone abstract art.

But I’m learning to take a few minutes and really look at some of the modern art that has made a difference to the Art World.

I was looking through my Pablo Picasso Gallery last eve, cleaning it up, straightening it up, when I came across the above painting. The Weeping Woman.

It  has been described as “an iconic work within the history of British Surrealism” (says Wikipedia).

I didn’t look up the meaning behind the painting, the inspiration, the emotions. All I did was sit and look at the woman to see what I could gleam from its entirety.

I can’t say that most Cubism moves me, but this one did. Are her tears in her Kleenex, or are they just boxed under her eyes? Her fingers near her mouth — is that her chin or another hand? A star in only one eye, two different colored hairs — enough of an abstract image to read pain and/or sorrow or both in her face.

There is a lot of modern art in this world that has a lot of meaning behind it, both what the artist intended and what they intended the viewer to decide. A friend once explained modern art as whatever the viewer sees and interprets.

We all see landscapes and portraits for what they are … recreating the exactness of a scene or a person. I’ve always loved scenic landscapes, precise details, realistic portrayals.

The Crying Woman is none of these.

Or is it?

I hope to explore other artists and their paintings one by one. Not all of them all at once. But to take a closer look at the ones that “call” me. After all, I would not have showcased the artist has something not caught my attention.

Do you ever take a second look at art that calls you in a somewhat different voice?

What do you see when you look at the Crying Woman?