Why Magritte Matters

[@AK-lg8fj]

I liked Magritte's work already, but I find him a lot more interesting after watching this video. Great talk.

[@dadsongs]

Excellent! I've been "lead" to learn more about Magritte after finishing a book of interviews of Marcel Duchamp. This certainly was a great start. Thanks.

[@oaktowndaddyg]

What a wonderful astute and informative lecture that was. Thank you for posting this lecture.

[@yagzkaterli6363]

They (Dada and Surrealism) are religions with a view of the world, a code of behaviour, a hatred of materialism and ideal of man's future state, a proselytising spirit, a joy in the membership of the community of the light-minded, a hostility to art for art's sake, a hope of transforming existence.

[@tombarlow6076]

That comment is about right. For that particular time in European history they were relevant. So much of the artistic tradition and habits of society that they railed against aNow is a time to re-build. Fresh

[@ShahyarGhanbari]

Great . Thanks a lot , Lady Sarah.

[@AckermannHans]

Fantastic lecture, so useful about Rene Margritte art philosophy.

[@buddhahoo1]

44:26 to establish strength from within. The cosmic egg.

[@mariaplugo9125]

I love his works.

[@Ko53lo]

Magritte exhibition coming to Amos Rex Museum in Helsinki for the first time within few weeks! Ceci n`est pas une joke!

[@ianwaldeck]

very good lecture thank you sarah.

[@veziculorile]

This was very interesting!

[@ZOGGYDOGGY]

“But for the present age, which prefers the sign to the thing signified, the copy to the original, representation to reality, appearance to essence, . . . truth is considered profane, and only illusion is sacred. Sacredness is in fact held to be enhanced in proportion as truth decreases and illusion increases, so that the highest degree of illusion comes to be seen as the highest degree of sacredness.” -Feuerbach, Preface to the Second Edition of The Essence of Christianity 1 In societies where modern conditions of production prevail, life is presented as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has receded into a representation. 2 The images detached from every aspect of life merge into a common stream in which the unity of that life can no longer be recovered. Fragmented views of reality regroup themselves into a new unity as a separate pseudo-world that can only be looked at. The specialization of images of the world has culminated in a world of autonomized images where even the deceivers are deceived. The spectacle is a concrete inversion of life, an autonomous movement of the nonliving. 3 The spectacle presents itself simultaneously as society itself, as a part of society, and as a means of unification. As a part of society, it is ostensibly the focal point of all vision and all consciousness. But due to the very fact that this secftor is separate, it is in reality the domain of delusion and false consciousness: the unification it achieves is nothing but an official language of universal separation. From: The Society of the Spectacle Chapter 1: Separation Perfected

[@twicetwo]

- Thanks to Ms. Sarah Whitfield, independent art critic! - A Talented person carries a heavy burden of his Talent.

[@Basedclips13]

I can’t believe how you can study art your entire life, and still not understand the message. Or even care for it. Every one dances around the issue/meaning the artists is almost rubbing in your face. Art is used as a form of communication like spoken/written language. There is a purpose to each artists work, a message they are trying to convey. How do you avoid that? And dance around it with other vague analogies, and quotes. If surrealism has been used as a form of satire, and the flag backdrop is used to as a form to convey ones perception the takeaway is not the darkness projected and mirrored in your view of the art. It is why we experience an eery feeling viewing the work. It is not to represent a materialistic view of the world but to prove that it’s the opposite. Life has meaning and inherent value. We are do not perceive this because life is a game, comprised of inherent suffering. You live an eery life when you do not see through the veil that is commonly portrayed in much of these works. I can’t believe you study art your entire life and do not notice this. You take the message for face value which is not the point. The fact that art even exists is a symbol for meaning and value in the first place. It’s intelligent people with amazing gifts/talents that take hours and years of their time to get you to come to the same truth, to realize this truth. Not accept the falsehood they want you to realize and consider not hold as the highest truth. It is a subconscious backlash from materialist philosophy.

[@thebabslife]

I agree, this talk was so superficial and robotically inhumane and not really caring about the feelings and emotions trying to be conveyed through his painting. Felt more like a reportage rather than an insight into his being.

[@carolward1142]

Superb! thank you so much :)

[@magicknight13]

His work is so amazing!

[@loretosilva7687]

Magritte is the best.

[@indefenseofreality]

Thank you this was amazing

[@Navenanthen]

Thank you, Sarah!

[@Flora1991rot]

Que bueno seria tener una traducción de este video

[@nellymunoz1201]

Does anybody knows who is the artist from Verne’s book?

[@evelanpatton]

The Tomb of the Restless 54:58.....ah, but he did, continuously📍🖇🖤.*

[@Mranderson666]

Thank You.

[@1977ajax]

Found much of this stretched beyond snapping point, and 'meaning' crushed out like blood from a stone. 'A column appears in a painting, _and there are columns in the cemetery._ A man wears a cloak _and it looks like a funerary urn.'_ Oh please! Had to break off there - too much academic Polyfilla for me.

[@dysonar]

Great , 🙌

[@sabrinanascimento1267]

I like his work. I can be more creative .

[@harperwelch5147]

18 mins in and no paintings by Magritte are shown. This lecture is more important than his art.

[@meetmarkarit732]

These Artist kind of used a lot of Dali's style.

[@teimozzy]

Meet Markarit ! No the styles have a difference. René Magritte used the relationship between words and pictures alot. Salvador Dalí forged a visual language capable of rendering his dreams and hallucinations. I'd rather say Magritte had his own unique style.

[@007clownfish]

I think Magrittes style and motifs are quite unique and thus a Magritte work is immediately recognizable. Both surrealist but two very different artists.

[@MarcusAlanWard]

Magritte is unique in that he uses ordinary objects/settings and places them a dreamlike or surrealist context. Dali painted entire abstracted/vivid worlds. Magritte's style is closer to actual dreams that we have though in my opinion. Dali is like an acid trip.

[@krisdexelle]

Meet Markarit ! Good observation! Miro indeed introduced the young Dali to Margritte in Paris. They stayed in touch and met several times. They share topics and influenced each other a lot. Margritte even introduced Dali to his future wife...

[@j.c.3800]

I always liked Magritte's comic side, but, well, not profound in any way.

[@josephmccafferty199]

Very blah blah blah. I wonder what Magritte would make of this sermon/ borefest. Seems to be stuffy stuff for stuffy people. very inaccessible INDEED!

[@josephmccafferty199]

This is not a lecture!

[@stndsure7275]

Freudian Psychobabble

[@notnek202]

Who cares

[@notnek202]

Get woke Go broke