“……”

The dean may have received it, and Lin Haven looked at the interface of the Valley of the Wicked and confirmed this.

Professor Roger gave up on treatment and randomly ordered a fourth student.

"Mr. Lin, the source classicism you founded has a high level of technical requirements, I wonder if you have any advice for learners? I went to see you, completely fascinated by it, and when I came back, I tried to draw a little bit of the picture in your work, but I found that I couldn't do it at all, not even a little like it. So with such a difficult technical requirement, will it hinder everyone from learning it?"

Thank God.

Professor Roger couldn't believe that he was really asking a professional question.

His eager eyes startled the student who asked the question, could it be that Professor Roger has a deep crush on me?

"I don't think we should underestimate everyone's ability, when there is no road, everyone will be at a loss, but after there is a tangible road, we should believe that there will be many people who will work harder to come up and go further. During the visit, Gerhard Richter said that the source classicism brings the future, and the future means infinite possibilities, because nature itself has infinite possibilities, and the breakthrough of this technique breaks the last bit of barrier between man and nature, between oil painting and nature, and oil painting will be able to fully express diverse and infinite nature.

So a technique that you said, a difficult technique, just a stepping stone into this infinite world, someone will get this brick, don't worry. Of course, perhaps more time, more commitment, more honing – rather than cranky – will be more and more necessary. ”

Many people looked at each other meaningfully.

Jump the track?

This point is too obvious.

In fact, in the past two days, those masters have visited, and the most eye-catching ones are Gerhard Richter, Gaspe Jones, and the remaining one is Jeff Koons. Qualitatively, Richter and Jeff Koons were Pop artists, and Gaspé was Pop and Neo-Dadaism – basically all scolded by Lin Haven.

Of course, Richter is different here, this great artist, to put it nicely, is called learning from others, and is tolerant of all rivers, and if it is not good, it is called a hodgepodge, going with the flow, trying everything, and all of them have high attainments. However, he must have a lot of his own creations, otherwise today's artistic leadership status would not be possible.

In addition, Gaspé is 86 years old this year, and most painters at this age actually started from traditional art education, but later rebelled and joined other trends of thought. He himself is actually one of the initiators of Pop, and a Pop artist.

Jeff Koons won't talk about it.

Such three people, the map cannon is a little smaller, take Richter out, and then shrink with a clear conscience, and take out Gaspe, but Jeff Koons can't take it out anyway.

So all three of them went to see Lin Haven's paintings, and then Lin Haven's genre is extremely opposed to them, and of course the outside world will want to pay attention to the gossip in it - invisible beep, the most deadly, the artist's gossip, the most profound, often one eighteen is decades and hundreds of years, such as Mona Lisa and da Vinci, ah, is it what, there have always been guesses.

In terms of various responses, Gerhard and Gaspey both gave high praise, even transcendent evaluations, which made the gossip lose a lot of color, and if the two old men stood up and scolded Lin Haven, everyone would be even more happy. Jeff Koons, who had high hopes for the rest, only said one sentence: It's a good painting!

There is no material to be eight.

And now, Lin Haiwen's "cranky thoughts" should be his first primary school controversy in the past three days. It seemed to be the key that started the enthusiasm for asking this question.

A gentleman grabbed the opportunity to ask a question, his hands almost raised to the ceiling, and the man stood up, and Roger couldn't ignore him.

"Gerhard, Gaspé, and Jeff are all artists that you don't recognize, but they all now somewhat affirm your achievements in Source Classicism, and I wonder if you should change your old opinion?

The first pointed question.

"It has never changed. Lin Haiwen's expression was also much more serious, and it was not the same as just now: "I answer you clearly, it has never changed! And I want to tell you clearly that I don't recognize or disapprove of artists, what I don't approve of is their works, or works that belong to the abstract and contemporary part, that's for sure."

Contemporary art is individualistic art, abstraction is from the outside to the inside, when we appreciate or interpret, an abstract masterpiece, it is usually at the spiritual level, philosophical level.

Do they have meaning? To the artist himself, they are meaningful, and to others, they are no more valuable than a chicken soup maxim – whether it is poisonous chicken soup or good chicken soup. Why? The theory of art needs to be interpreted, but art itself should not need to be interpreted. Pollock's paintings, if you don't have a thick research dictionary to tell you how remarkable, how subversive, how thrilling, the only thing you feel is like, "It's so big!" It's just a big painting, and you might feel a little bit more about something else. That's not in the realm of art.

But I'm sure that many of you here today have gone to see me, and even when you see these famous works, you don't need someone to tell you what they contain, what they hide, and they can't just say big or small. You feel that they are beautiful, that they are enjoyable, that they are able to transcend the reality of what you see, and thus bring about a kind of contrasting amazement or spontaneous thinking.

This is the art of oil painting.

So if I could, I think it would be more appropriate to classify Pollock as philosophers rather than painters. But philosophy is niche, even if such a popular philosophical argument as Freud's psychoanalysis is still a weapon for beeping, why? because it is a minority, the minority can be a beep. But abstraction, and so noisy, that it's not so philosophical.

It's a deformed product.

The shell of painting has been derived from other media, philosophical systems, and it is a bit unsuitable. With the rise of the United States, the two world wars, the explosion of science and technology, the art world has been turned upside down, and the human spiritual world has also been turned upside down.

There is a saying in China that there will always be something unreasonable in the era of change, and this is the case with abstraction.

I told Gerhard that there is no problem with abstract artists, and there is no problem with abstraction, if they stop at the observation and representation of the self by some individual – that is typical philosophical thinking. But now that they are all too famous, and their works are too valuable, there is a problem. It should be me who is famous, and I should be the one whose works are valuable, which is no problem and a reasonable state. ”