paulfish4570
Veteran
peter_n
Veteran
She was an unbelievable talent. The beautiful book of her photo collection is very interesting, and her diary is stunning. I was lucky enough to visit an exhibit of her paintings in Dublin last year, and I have two or three of her books as a result. She and Diego Rivera were quite a pair, he was big both literally and metaphorically, but she was all about imagination. He is more famous, but she was the genius.
Pablito
coco frío
wtf........
paulfish4570
Veteran
i think i might agree with your summation. if i ever get to go back to mexico, i'd love to stay over in mexico city and see the blue house museum ...
Pablito
coco frío
The blue house is very moving and a great place to visit. But before taking Diego out of contention for the genius category you need to see the murals in the National Palace. I don't know what "genius" is but it seems to me Diego is a good candidate, not just Frida.
Araakii
Well-known
I was at the Blue House three months ago. It's one of my best experiences in Mexico City.
My personal feeling is that Diego was definitely more capable and established in the traditional sense, but Frida's creativity was a lot more interesting and she was way ahead of her time.
My personal feeling is that Diego was definitely more capable and established in the traditional sense, but Frida's creativity was a lot more interesting and she was way ahead of her time.
robklurfield
eclipse
They were both geniuses in my humble estimation. The Guggenheim had a recent exhibit of some of Diego's mural work that was kind of staggering. Frida and he were geniuses each of a different species.
Haigh
Gary Haigh
Thanks for posing that link. She is an inspiration for me as I am sure she is for many others.
paulfish4570
Veteran
you're welcome.
i have not seen rivera's work live. it has to be a staggering difference to see it in scale.
ok, both troubled geniuses. it is surprising, really, that kahlo lived as long as she did in such crippling pain. her writings that tell of her reasons for painting what she did describe a personal hell that dante couldn't make up ...
i have not seen rivera's work live. it has to be a staggering difference to see it in scale.
ok, both troubled geniuses. it is surprising, really, that kahlo lived as long as she did in such crippling pain. her writings that tell of her reasons for painting what she did describe a personal hell that dante couldn't make up ...
robklurfield
eclipse
Paul, Frida sure did a spectacular job of depicting all that pain (physical and psychic) in her work.
paulfish4570
Veteran
she sure did, rob. and now that i have looked at photos of her, i realize how really well she painted. primitive, my eye ...
peter_n
Veteran
OK, both geniuses. My wife & I have argued about this. One of my nippers who lived in Mexico City for a year + agrees with me. It is so weird to see both their work; hers in some cases tiny, his gargantuan. So different in every way, maybe it was a case of opposites attracting...
Her self portraits are really quite remarkable and this may be a shallow comparison, but I did think of Frida Kahlo when Vivian Maier's stuff came out.
Her self portraits are really quite remarkable and this may be a shallow comparison, but I did think of Frida Kahlo when Vivian Maier's stuff came out.