<p>Romanticism>>>impressionism>>>>>>>>>modernism>>>>>all>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>rap.</p>
<p>:O I’m a Romantic! Caspar David Friedrich and William Blake are my idols
I prefer modernism to impressionism, but only because Renoir’s portraits are creepy as *******. I do like post-Impressionism, however. I find some of Gauguin’s and Seurat’s work to be incredible</p>
<p>Actually, I really like Impressionist landscapes too. Like Pisarro.</p>
<p>Idk. Romantic>>>>>>>>>>>>all definitely. (Somehow I figured you were a Romantic…o.O) Below that, almost everything is similar in quality. I find that there are styles where one style’s average quality is lower than that of another style’s, but then the “lower quality” style also encompasses works better than anything that could have been produced in the other style. Most of modernism I find to be a waste of time, but there are some really* good pieces.</p>
<p>*size=+10000; bold; italic; bright green</p>
<p>You definitely need to find your tastes with Modernism, because within it there are a number of movements. I generally dislike most art outside of the Bauhaus, Vorticist, Dada, Surrealist, De Stijl, and Der Blaue Reiter movements, though I do like Matisse as well</p>
<p>I think that its about time art went back to its roots. There really isn’t any further to go if people just try to keep innovating like they have for the past 50 years or so. </p>
<p>What’s your opinion of Mannerism?</p>
<p>(returning from Wikipedia)
Realism>Mannerism. I like the fact that it’s more dynamic than maybe Renaissance art, but either you adhere more or less perfectly to real proportions or you completely mess them up–else I won’t like it. :P</p>
<p>(This is why I don’t like most of my own drawings.) =(</p>
<p>If you don’t keep innovating something, then eventually it gets repetitive.</p>
<p>idk - Botticelli for example uses the same style in all of his paintings, but I find them all interesting despite their similarities in execution</p>
<p>We now pause while leafblade1354 looks up Botticelli and all the other abovementioned names. (You realize I’m not exactly a humanities person…I dabble, but not that much. :p)</p>
<p>EDIT: Fair enough, I suppose. I like the way he renders faces. That’s the best thing about old (generally speaking) paintings–is they’re always smiling. Or at least praying. :/</p>
<p>The style can be the same, but you have to have different subject material. He seems to have painted a wide variety of scenes, from close-up portraits to semi-pastoral to…whatever you call large crowds of people.</p>
<p>lol sry. I love art history</p>
<p>I find older art to be quite charming as well as often more dazziling in execution</p>
<p>^Lol. I like art, but I don’t know too much about it. I’m the gawker in the museum.</p>