I went to an exhibition of his works that did a very good job of collecting many of his well known paintings from various sources.
It quickly became clear that the physical size any painting was unpredictable however familiar I was with it from a book. The guy knew how to paint!
Wow, I didn’t realize that. It’s pretty surprising considering he also has some truly massive paintings. Like, reconsider your architecture if you’re planning to buy one, big.
If I could get Escher to reconsider my architecture I’d do it in a heartbeat.
Just don’t let him install your stairs
But the stairs are the main incentive
I saw it at the MoMA in NYC. The thing is tiny…
There was a thread recently asking why museums were worth it or something like that. The Dalí museum in St Pete Florida is what I used as an example, so many of good paintings are either tiny or huge and no art book I have has properly conveyed that.
I went there on a field trip through my community college. The museum was amazing, definitely worth the trip if you’re in Florida.
Hehe, that’s funny. So everyone thinks it’s this profound thing, but he was actually just talking about the size of office paper?
