When considering the painting “Guernica” by Pablo Picasso we must first consider why the piece meets the criteria of an actual work of art. First, we define wether the piece was made by an artist and why this artist is accredited. This painting was done by Picasso, one of the most renowned painters of his time. When mentioning the art of painting, Picasso is the first name that comes to the forefront of many minds. All artists and people alike recognized and continue to recognize Picasso’s work as art because of how influential and and shaping it was on his generation. Now we must decipher whether this piece was intended to be a work of art. Through research we see that Picasso wanted to make a political statement with this painting. There was much thought and preparation that went into the making of this work of art. The real world relevance and the preparation show that the piece was obviously intended to be a work of art. As we move to the descriptive criticism we must look at how the work is physically put together and how it is unified as a whole. “Guernica” is full of many exaggerated and unique shapes. Looking closely we see the painting is made up of layers. The bottom layer is full of very large basic shapes such as rectangles and triangles, while upper layers show more unique and defined drawings. Many drawings are distorted and in areas very exaggerated. The work is unified through its basic grayscale colors across the entire painting and also through the previously stated, consistent and distorted nature of all the objects. As we look at the organization of this painting it may seem that it has none, but looking deeper we see that every piece of the puzzle has its place. “Guernica” is very balanced in its structure, the painting is not “leaning” to the left or the right. It is obvious that Picasso was very careful about the placement of the objects and shapes in the painting. Finally, when descriptively criticizing a work of art it is...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document