I was lucky enough to attend a private viewing at the Courtauld, it's such a fabulous collection and setting. I didn't do much in the way of 'circulating', but stood captivated by this and many other masterpieces.
Really? You can’t think of a room with a greater collection French Impressionist works of art? Does the word Orsay ring a bell to you? For Christ’s sake…
While it's true that the Musée d'Orsay's whole collection is greater, AGD is speaking here about a single room (this is the continuation of an earlier video where he discusses the other works) - and in that regard, he is quite probably correct. It's also considerably less crowded, and you can actually spend longer looking without recourse to pointy elbows,
@@Flaubertine-wn9jk A. He’s not talking about crowds and the walking-around experience, he’s talking very specifically about the quality of a collection of works of art. There is no greater impressionist collection than the one at Orsay, that’s a well known fact to people who actually know about art and museum. B. I’m not talking about Orsay’s “whole collection”, I’m talking about impressionism. And there is a “single room” dedicated to their impressionist collection (which you’ve clearly never visited). What he says is simply not true. If you’re going to try to correct someone publicly, at least make sure you actually know more than them.
@@themarquis336 There's really no need to be rude. As a matter of fact, I was at the Musée d'Orsay three weeks ago to see the Paris 1874 exhibition and visited the main Impressionist collection as well while I was there - and I've been many times before. It is undeniable: their collection - only rivaled by the Met's - is the greatest, and most extensive, collection of Impressionist works anywhere on earth. It's also true that it is housed in a series of large, interconnected galleries that would take a good fifteen minutes just to walk through; and that's not counting other Impressionist works dotted throughout the museum. The Courtauld's collection, by contrast, is now housed in two rooms at the top of the building: a small gallery containing Manet's sketch for Le dejeuner sur l'herbe, and works by Degas and Renoir amongst others. The larger room - itself not huge by museum standards - houses, of course, the Bar at the Folies-Bergère, but also major paintings by Monet, Seurat, Cézanne, Van Gogh, and Gauguin. For its size - which is Andrew Graham Dixon's key point - it has one of the greatest concentrations of masterpieces, and provides an astonishing overview of the best of French painting from 1870 to around 1910. Perhaps you should visit it some day? You might learn something - but probably not humility.
I was lucky enough to attend a private viewing at the Courtauld, it's such a fabulous collection and setting. I didn't do much in the way of 'circulating', but stood captivated by this and many other masterpieces.
it would be good if you did not just parrot what t j clark already brilliantly wrote about it and gave your own take on the painting, though
Really? You can’t think of a room with a greater collection French Impressionist works of art? Does the word Orsay ring a bell to you? For Christ’s sake…
While it's true that the Musée d'Orsay's whole collection is greater, AGD is speaking here about a single room (this is the continuation of an earlier video where he discusses the other works) - and in that regard, he is quite probably correct. It's also considerably less crowded, and you can actually spend longer looking without recourse to pointy elbows,
@@Flaubertine-wn9jk A. He’s not talking about crowds and the walking-around experience, he’s talking very specifically about the quality of a collection of works of art. There is no greater impressionist collection than the one at Orsay, that’s a well known fact to people who actually know about art and museum.
B. I’m not talking about Orsay’s “whole collection”, I’m talking about impressionism. And there is a “single room” dedicated to their impressionist collection (which you’ve clearly never visited).
What he says is simply not true.
If you’re going to try to correct someone publicly, at least make sure you actually know more than them.
@@themarquis336 There's really no need to be rude. As a matter of fact, I was at the Musée d'Orsay three weeks ago to see the Paris 1874 exhibition and visited the main Impressionist collection as well while I was there - and I've been many times before. It is undeniable: their collection - only rivaled by the Met's - is the greatest, and most extensive, collection of Impressionist works anywhere on earth. It's also true that it is housed in a series of large, interconnected galleries that would take a good fifteen minutes just to walk through; and that's not counting other Impressionist works dotted throughout the museum. The Courtauld's collection, by contrast, is now housed in two rooms at the top of the building: a small gallery containing Manet's sketch for Le dejeuner sur l'herbe, and works by Degas and Renoir amongst others. The larger room - itself not huge by museum standards - houses, of course, the Bar at the Folies-Bergère, but also major paintings by Monet, Seurat, Cézanne, Van Gogh, and Gauguin. For its size - which is Andrew Graham Dixon's key point - it has one of the greatest concentrations of masterpieces, and provides an astonishing overview of the best of French painting from 1870 to around 1910. Perhaps you should visit it some day? You might learn something - but probably not humility.