fedeee

actually.. at this point the title is more accurate like this, since it describes the 3, but in reality it’s the 2 @@ aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah caaaaooooooooooooooooosss

Well, I didn’t know which one was on display, I just said it was a cycle and that there could have been confusion because of that. You could have mentioned it right away if you knew, and that's it. And then why not put n.2 in the title of the review at this point? I read n.2 in the comments, it wasn’t sexyajax who wrote it, so not having seen the exhibition and not having the catalog, as an unaware reader I deduced with my common sense what could be inferred from what was written :D... let’s say I gave sexy the benefit of the doubt. Anyway, now panapp has said everything that needed to be said, so it seems to me the matter is concluded.

Sorry, but since it's a cycle, probably Nu Descendant Un Escalier (the one sexyajax talks about) is watercolor, ink, pencil, and pastel on photographic paper, while Nu Descendant Un Escalier n.2 (the one more present on the internet, etc.) is oil on canvas (the one panapp refers to). I relied on pure common sense and this little page Duchamp, Marcel nell'Enciclopedia Treccani which states that the first one is from 1911 and the second from 1912.

Of course, confusion arises anyway because sexyajax dated it like this: "Nu Descendent Un Escalier" (1912-16)! and in fact, I only found the date 1911 at this link. So I don’t know... think about it if you want! I won’t say anything else because dating issues give me hives :D p.s. I still believe that saying there’s no relationship, completely different research, and so on, between Futurism and this Duchamp is quite excessive, but in these matters, we could discuss endlessly... sometimes I find myself doing something that seems influenced by another for some and not for me, and sometimes the opposite (not that I want to compare myself to Duchamp haha)... I'm always skeptical about art criticism or art history built on these bases, I prefer to stick to "for me" and usually only say certain things (but after all, sexy expressed doubt about how this work was included in the exhibition... a work that was not admitted at the time to the Salon des Indépendants because it was too futurist muahauahuah)... after all, even great connoisseurs of the subject are divided, I don’t see why all these problems in the comments above. billa.

again?!?

@uomopesce well, I never accept recommendations... :D

From the reviews and my little searches on YouTube, it seems very pleasant :)!

I had never seen it, but as a child, the poster disturbed me.

eeeh...the problem with grades in fifth year and in general the graaadesss! I would like one between 3 and 4 (the TRatto) and one between 4 and 5 (the QUinque)! especially between 4 and 5 (not everything is an 8 or 10) because, in the end, I've never been able to stand a 7 (is it passing or good?) so having a TRatto, I'm not sure how beneficial it would be :DD!!@@ I'd also have problems with tenths, I would start wanting "the halves" ahahah! In the end, I adapt spontaneously to round off the not full grades! Maybe there should be an explanatory grid between numerical evaluation and its verbal explanation (like passing, good, more than good...), but then everything would be too complicated and that’s it!:D Anyway, I also reason enough by references when I know everything well and I have the right comparisons to make, but I always wonder if it’s right because then the grade is relative and subjective in general, and particularly, there’s always that time when something just doesn’t fit into our heads (and after all, art shouldn’t really be categorized and should surprise!) and that's why I ultimately find assigning a number rather pointless, and the reasoning by references falls apart because it wouldn’t be as objective as I’d like to make it seem, it would be masked subjectivity...maybe evaluation should remain only for exact sciences, that's it! For the rest, it’s quite hypocritical ahahaha! I find myself more and more often not grading for this! aah I’ve gone on a rant!@@

panapp is right... I have to admit that I considered you a DeCaso in the past, then somewhat stingy with grades (like the 7-- they used to give me in high school), but here I agree... especially with "the Europe of the belle époque etc. etc." ;D

Well said, my friends! There are characters and works that are untouchable in my opinion, and one of these is Leonardo and everything he did... I don't think many can be placed in the same category in music, literature, cinema, or the arts in general; Leonardo is one of the few cases!! :D In fact, I don't think I would get agitated over many others; usually, I readily accept relativism and differing opinions (even if they are expressed in a vulgar manner here)! :)