Evidence » course: visual culture

i think you are wrong about the happy sky.

it looks rather forboding, evil even.

I agree that the sky does not seem to be very happy to me either. Red will always mean blood to me--color association ^_^

I wouldn't say that the picture is without incredible talent either. I'm not an artist myself and perhaps not extremely skilled in the conventions of art in the modern era, but I don't see a lack of talent. I immediately thought of Mannerism and how it was not that artists could not paint realistically or naturally, but that their message was different so their style was as well. Like in any work, the artist chooses to work a certain way for a reason. The suffering in Jesus' face is very moving and real to me and I think it holds the mark of talent. Also, it could be argued about how profound it could be as well, but a lot of it is personal interpretation.

It seems too cartoonish for so much suffering- you know what I mean?

Interesting...I suppose it looks a bit like stereotypical comic book art--which could be seen as cartoonish depending on the specific illustrater--especially in the use of color and even form; I hadn't thought about the 'cartoonish' quality before, actually, and it's a good point to raise. Of course, I'd strongly argue that a certain style of art is not wrong for any scene if it is able to convey meaning to the viewer (especially, ha, since I just came back from a conference about comic books...). And at least to me, that is still clear in this case. I think the picture is nice also for its simple and direct approach; there is little background distraction and the viewer is face to face with Christ's suffering, up close and unavoidable.