Art that was hiding in plain sight
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
The intentions seem good and directed by a close relative controlling the estate.
The cheeky part of me thinks this is classic genius Mega behavior to 'unearth' or 'discover' a piece that would go for a hundred or maybe two hundred thousand dollars more (Hauser & Wirth).
Plus now they can upsell the 'original' work on paper! it's now a diptych ;) they'll send a PDF, no pricing, nothings available.
Love the last sentence of the article, the mad scramble of galleries, museums, collectors hoping to find a double freebie in their collection!
But i do also 'feel' emotion in it, also reminds me of a darker degas dancers in the shapes/movement.
when evaluating this kind of art one should look at the time and history when it was made.
One of the other commenters mentions his sad personally history, I think a lot of it related to loss in the Armenian Genocide and how to express those emotions.
maybe start the timeline looking at impressionism, post impressionism. i mentioned monet above as an example, one of my favorite artists ever - if you're in paris check out the orangerie...
One way to look at it - and there are a billion ways that's kid of the point of AbEx - is to draw a line from realism -> invention of photography -> huge changes in society, intellectualism, e.g. look at the paris school of artists of the time -> which is all majorly blunted by war -> which leads to a specific culture many early and contemporary artists rebel against. they want to express their own unique personality.
All of this re imagining what art is and what composition can be with no restraints of trying to be 'realistic,' since you can't beat a photo.
But that just one simplistic take of history.