During my documentary binge, I noticed a certain familiarity in much of the Modern Masters work, despite seeing much of it for the first time. I dat wondering, "Now where have I seen that creative weirdness before???" and quickly realized it was from everyday pop culture.

 

Check out Cartoon Network's "Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends" (a favorite of Joscelyne's- she even had a choreographed dance she made up for the opening theme).

 

 

The character above, Walt, is a perfect modern art mashup of long and short and bright colors. One eye, large, the other small, both on red stems protruding from the head. And the background? Bright purple, violet and hot pink flowers and petals.

 

 

Some of these elements are identifiable in many of Picasso's works such as the above, "The Three Dancers". Long lines, sharp curves, bright colors and faces all out of proportion.

 

 

The ever colorful Lady Gaga's latest, Artpop, which may or may not be a flop, is chock full of modern art. I see Salvador Dali and of course, Andy Warhol. These photos are album cover art.

 

 

 

 

Below is the extremely odd "Baby Map of the World, 1939" by Dali, who loved to pair people or body parts with inanimate objects such as globe stands, clocks, and telephones. Above, Gaga poses naked on a seat of what looks like computer guts- hard drives, motherboards and cords galore. When I first glanced at it, I thought she was a giant sitting amongst a tiny city scape. Either way, the mix of technology, flesh and strange sizing is so Dali.

 

 

 

Recently, Gaga even donned an upturned, handlebar mustache- an obvious ode to Dali.

 

 

 

 

By the way, not everyone likes the mix of "high art" and pop music. James Poulos, writing at The Daily Beast, takes to task Gaga and Jay Z for his recent "Magna Carta Holy Grail":

 

For big time pop stars, “serious” art—the kind that sells for millions, made by celebrity artists—is more dangerous than heroin. And if we don’t make sense of why, Gaga won’t be the last musical A-lister to die trying to infuse pop art with the coveted status of “serious” art.  

 

Even now, she’s not the only one struggling to do just that. Jay-Z is falling into the same trap. “Jeff Koons balloons, I just wanna blow up,” he raps on “Picasso Baby,” name-checking the artist famous for making giant reflective metal versions of twisty inflatable animals. Blabbing away with Pharrell, another art-validated pop impresario, Koons explains the human element in his work: “What I love about the reflective surface is that it affirms. It’s about you. You move, all of the sudden the abstraction on the surface moves.” 

 

Yet in the hands of Gaga and Hova, the ostensibly playful Koons isn’t a resource for deepening our sense of love or spontaneity. His specially commissioned sculpture of Lady Gaga is so denuded of life and humanity that it deadens ARTPOP before Gaga even has a chance to get out a note. In Jay-Z’s hands, Koons is like a bigger, better version of his own $800 black-leather-and-python Yankees hat (available now at Barneys!)—just another way to proudly flaunt that your relevance. Jay is so relevant he can drop four and a half million dollars on a Basquiat painting, and star alongside Pablo Picasso himself in a Google Glass project set to dazzle the Right People at Miami Art Week.

 

...

 

Today, art attracts money because it attracts attention. That much is clear—and fair enough. But it’s not at all clear why today’s “serious” art attracts that attention. Perhaps that’s why such art is a small game, its market value aside. Only a tiny slice of humanity really cares—and many of those who do care do so on a level whose shallowness might be deeply appropriate, but which deprives those who associate with it of the shareably human depth that defines our most beloved musicians.

 

For pop musicians, the consequences are predictable. Taking your cues from Koons is like singing inside a balloon. Wrapping yourself in “serious” art is like rapping behind a Rothko. At its elite heights, pop music uses its visceral, universal, and vulnerable character to draw moving surprises from a fidelity to form. At the heights of “serious” art, we have the reverse—a total rejection of the discipline of form, with a total loss of human impact, human relevance, and human accessibility.

 

Ouch. I'm not going to lie. I'm not crazy about about "Magna Carta Holy Grail". It's not the worse Jigga album (to me, that dubious honor should go to The Blueprint 2, which was two CDs long and bloated with boring tracks- he fixed it with the release of 2.1 the following year), but it's far from his best. I'm also not feeling most of what I've heard on Gaga's latest. That track with R. Kelly just seems confused. Maybe Poulos has a point.

 

Anyway, I also caught a documentary on Manet, who set the art world on it's head with his very candid paintings.

 

 

"Chez le Pére Lethuille" (Source)

 

 

They might've been jaw dropping at the time due to their voyeuristic feel, but now? Totally normal. My absolute favorite photos are candids.

 

 

Life through the lens. (Source)

 

Can you think of anything- from clothes to cartoons- that is influenced by Modern Art?