TIME Holidays

See How Picasso, van Gogh and Other Famous Artists Would Serve a Thanksgiving Meal

Hannah Rothstein

Turkey, graving and stuffing get a complete makeover in this series by a California-based artist

When it comes to serving a successful meal, everybody knows that it’s all about presentation.

With that in mind, San Francisco-based artist Hannah Rothstein decided to create 10 versions of a similar meal, all in the styles of famous artists. But Rothstein, who makes everything from paintings and illustrations to jewelry and murals, had never worked with food before, so this idea was totally new for her.

“It was kind of one of those out of the blue moments, like a lot of moments of inspiration and creativity,” Rothstein tells TIME. She initially planned to do a series of illustrations imitating different artists’ brushstrokes, but realized that was “incredibly boring” and not particularly creative. But soon, a better idea came to her. “Thanksgiving had been on my mind, so that popped into my head, and I thought, ‘Oh! Thanksgiving food!'”

Rothstein settled on 10 artists who all had distinct and recognizable styles – like Piet Mondrian, pictured above. Some artists’ styles were fairly straightforward to recreate, but others, like Georges Seurat, who’s best known for his use of pointillism, required incredibly fastidious work, Rothstein said.

Want to hang one of these on your dining room wall? Rothstein is selling 25 signed prints of each photo and donating 10 percent of the proceeds to the SF-Marin Food Bank.

“I really love making art and I think bringing beauty into the world is important, but in many ways I find art to be a selfish act,” Rothstein says. “So for this, it made sense to donate to the food bank to help people who couldn’t afford their own Thanksgiving meals to have one.”

Check out all the plates – including an especially surprising one at the end.

Piet Mondrian:

Hannah Rothstein

René Magritte:

Hannah Rothstein

Mark Rothko:

Hannah Rothstein

Vincent van Gogh:

Hannah Rothstein

Pablo Picasso:

Hannah Rothstein

Jackson Pollack:

Hannah Rothstein

Julian Schnabel:

Hannah Rothstein

Georges Seurat:

Hannah Rothstein

Andy Warhol:

Hannah Rothstein

Cindy Sherman:

Cindy+Sherman+Thanksgiving

Read next: These Carpets Map Out Different Countries’ Aerial Landscapes

TIME Fine Art

Georgia O’Keeffe Sets New Auction Record for Women Artists

Georgia O'Keeffe
American artist Georgia O'Keeffe looks off into the distance with her hands on a piece of pottery, Abiquiu, New Mexico, 1974. Joe Munroe—Getty Images

"Jimson Weed/White Flower No. 1" quadrupled the previous record

The woman best known for her flower paintings set a new auction record for the most expensive work of art by a woman. “Jimson Weed/White Flower No. 1″ sold for $44.4 million at Sotheby’s on Thursday, almost triple the auction house’s high estimate.

The hammer price is four times higher than the previous record holder: an untitled painting by Joan Mitchell that sold for $11.9 million.

As TIME first wrote of O’Keeffe in 1928, “When Georgia O’Keeffe paints flowers, she does not paint fifty flowers stuffed into a dish. On most of her canvases there appeared one gigantic bloom, its huge feathery petals furled into some astonishing pattern of color and shade and line…It is enough to say that Miss O’Keeffe’s paintings are as full of passion as the verses of Solomon’s Song.”

[Bloomberg]

 

TIME Art

Google Doodle Celebrates Corita Kent, Feminist Nun Turned Artist

Google

It would have been her 96th birthday

Google celebrated what would have been the 96th birthday of artist Corita Kent on Thursday — also known as Sister Corita Kent.

In 1936, Kent started her career as a Catholic nun. She began taking art classes, and received a masters in art history — chairing the art history department at Immaculate Heart College. In 1968, she left the order and decided to pursue a full-time career as an artist.

Kent was known for her silk screens, and she often juxtaposed spiritual writing alongside symbols of consumerist culture. She was a well-known activist, fighting for civil rights, anti-war causes, and women’s rights.

She died in 1986.

TIME Culture

Kara Walker Watched You Gape at Her The Subtlety Exhibit All Summer

Artist Kara Walker attends the Wall Street Journal Magazine 2014 Innovator Awards at the Museum of Modern Art on Nov. 5, 2014 in New York City.
Artist Kara Walker attends an event at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City on Nov. 5, 2014 Mike Coppola—Getty Images

The contemporary artist was actually recording people as they, at times, took inappropriate pictures of the 75-ft. sphinx made of sugar

Over the summer, contemporary artist Kara Walker invited New Yorkers to view a 75-ft. sphinx the artist fashioned out of sugar and designed in the likeness of a woman with exaggerated, black features and a “mammy” scarf. But what happened during the months-long viewing of The Subtlety or the Marvelous Sugar Baby was shocking to some.

Writers at the Root were surprised and disappointed by what they considered the sexual objectification of Walker’s work by onlookers. “From the days of the slave trade to even having black butts on display in music videos, the black woman’s body seems to easily garner laughs and mockery, even if it’s made out of sugar,” wrote Yesha Callahan.

Yet there was one person who wasn’t surprised by the onlookers snapping pictures, sticking their tongues out at the giant vulva or pretending to hold the bulging, sugar-coated breasts: the artist. In fact, at one point Walker recorded you while you were doing it. According to Vulture, Walker had this to say during a Los Angeles talk in October:

I put a giant 10-foot vagina in the world and people respond to giant 10-foot vaginas in the way that they do. It’s not unexpected. Maybe I’m sick. Sometimes I get a sort of kick out of the hyper essay writing, that there’s gotta be this way to sort of control human behavior. [But] human behavior is so mucky and violent and messed-up and inappropriate. And I think my work draws on that. It comes from there. It comes from responding to situations like that, and it pulls it out of an audience …

A clip of visitors taking photos, gazing contemplatively and discussing the exhibit among friends and family on the last day of the exhibit is available at Vulture. A 28-minute video titled An Audience will debut at a New York City gallery on Friday and run through January. The video is a part of a new exhibit by the artist.

[Vulture]

TIME Innovation

Artist Uses Glass Instead of Yarn to Create Amazing Knitting Sculptures

Carol Milne manipulates glass to look like rows of intertwined yarn

lost-at-e-minor_logo

This article originally appeared on Lost at E Minor.

It boggles the mind how artist Carol Milne was able to manipulate glass to look like row upon row of intertwined yarn. You see, the melting point of glass is between 1,400 – 1,600 degrees Fahrenheit, so how was she able to knit the fragile – not to mention very hot – material into intricate artworks?

Milne invented the process herself in 2006. She first makes a wax model of the sculpture, which is then encased by a refractory mold material (that can withstand hot temperatures.) The second step involves melting out the wax with steam and replacing it with pieces of glass. She then heats the mold to 1,400 – 1,600 degrees Fahrenheit, which melts the glass, allowing it to occupy the mold’s empty cavities. The piece is left to cool for several weeks before Milne starts chipping away at the shell to reveal the details of the sculpture.

The result is nothing short of amazing and worthy of this time-consuming process. You can see more of her works over on her Facebook page.

(via This Is Colossal)

TIME Fine Art

2 Warhol Portraits Sell for Over $150 Million

A couple talk in front of "Triple Elvis" by Andy Warhol during a media preview at Christie's auction house in New York, October 31, 2014.
A couple talk in front of "Triple Elvis" by Andy Warhol during a media preview at Christie's auction house in New York, October 31, 2014. Brendan McDermid—Reuters

The bidding only lasted 6 minutes

Two Andy Warhol images were sold in New York Wednesday for $151 million, breaking pre-sale estimates by millions of dollars.

“Triple Elvis,” a 1963 silkscreen image, sold for about $81 million, after projections that it would draw about $55 million. And the 1953 “Four Marlons” fetched $69.6 million.

These two sales were part of a record-breaking, $852.9 million night at Christie’s New York, setting the all-time high for postwar and contemporary art sales.

TIME Art

The Museum of Modern Art, Then and Now

The Museum of Modern Art Then & Now
Left: The Heckscher building circa 1925; Right: The current day Museum of Modern Art and its outdoor sculpture garden. Edwin Levick—Hulton Archive/Getty Images; Timothy Hursley—The Museum of Modern Art/AP

MoMA opened 85 years ago — but not in the building art aficionados know today

When the first-ever exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City opened 85 years ago, on Nov. 7, 1929, the “museum” wasn’t exactly the institution today’s visitors might expect. At the time, the city’s museum crown was indisputably in the hands of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The Met did not share the spotlight and the Met did not do modern. In return, artists of the time had turned up their noses at its hallowed halls; viewing it, as TIME phrased it back then, “only as a trysting place for shopgirls and their beaux, a shelter for nurse-girls and babies on rainy days, a ‘point of interest’ for out-of-towners.”

When seven collectors and patrons — including Mrs. John Davison Rockefeller Jr. and Vanity Fair editor Frank Crowninshield — announced that September that they would open a Museum of Modern Art to bridge the gap, the museum was actually a few rooms in the Heckscher Building, on the corner of Fifth Avenue and 57th Street. Not having a proper museum, it turned out, didn’t really make a difference: the following March, TIME reported that 1,500 people a day visited the museum — and that the trustees of the institution would have to start charging admission, 50 cents a head, in order to better manage the flow of visitors.

In 1932, the museum moved to a site on 53rd Street that, over the years, would evolve into the building MoMA inhabits today, with six floors of galleries instead of six rooms.

TIME Third Reich

Art for the Reich’s Sake: When Nazis Celebrated ‘Aryan’ Culture

Color photos from "A Day of German Art," a kind of Aryan-inflected kickoff for the Third Reich's annual Great German Art Exhibition

For several years in the late 1930s and early 1940s, during the summer months, Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich held what came to be known as “A Day of German Art,” conceived as a kind of Aryan-inflected kickoff for the annual Great German Art Exhibition in Munich. Paintings, sculpture and spectacle combined to celebrate a strenuously Nazified vision of Teutonic culture—one in which German legends and myths were bent to the service (and the aesthetic) of the Reich.

“Approved” German art, after all, was yet another form of Reich propaganda, utterly in line with radio broadcasts, photographs, films and other vehicles designed to spread the Nazi gospel. Hitler and others extolled realist paintings and sculptures, while dismissing as “degenerate” the art of Surrealists, Fauvists, Expressionists and other Moderns. The idyllic and the mythological, as well as scenes depicting and romanticizing family values, hard work, robust physicality, the military and, of course, the Fatherland’s leaders were, in the Reich’s eyes, the only true, legitimate subjects for art.

Here, in Hitler’s own words, from a speech he gave during the first “Day of German Art” in 1937, was the vision that the Führer and his followers—Goebbels, Bernard Rust, Alfred Rosenberg and others—formulated and shoved down the (often acquiescent) public’s throat during the run-up to World War II:

It was not Bolshevik art collectors or their literary henchmen who laid the foundation for a new art or even secured the continued existence of art in Germany. No, we were the ones who created this state and have since then provided vast sums for the encouragement of art. . . .

We are more interested in ability than in so-called intent. An artist who is counting on having his works displayed, in [the Haus der Kunst, or House of Art] or anywhere else in Germany, must possess ability. . . . [But] from the pictures submitted for exhibition, I must assume that the eye of some men shows them things different from the way they really are. There really are men who can see in the shapes of our people only decayed cretins; who feel that meadows are blue, the heavens green, clouds sulfur-yellow. They like to say that they experience these things in this way.

I do not want to argue about whether or not they really experience this. But in the name of the German people I only want to prevent these pitiable unfortunates, who clearly suffer from defective vision, from attempting with their chatter to force on their contemporaries the results of their faulty observations, and indeed from presenting them as “art”. . . .

I know, therefore, that when the Volk passes through these galleries it will recognize in me its own spokesman and counselor [ . . . ] it will draw a sigh of relief and joyously express its agreement with this purification of art. And this is decisive, for an art that cannot count on the ready inner agreement of the broad, healthy mass of the people, but which must instead rely on the support of small, partially indifferent cliques, is intolerable.

By the time the last “Day of German Art” took place in 1944, the “invincible” German army that had swept across Europe a few years before, seemingly conquering at will, was routinely being routed by Allied forces from the east and the west. By the late spring of 1945, Hitler, Goebbels, Rust and most of the rest of the Reich’s leadership was dead, or on the run.

The Haus der Kunst in Munich, meanwhile, still stands. No longer serving as a full-fledged museum, the enormous building now houses temporary and traveling exhibitions, often featuring the sort of “degenerate” art that the Nazis railed against, so loudly and so futilely, not so very long ago.

TIME

How to Draw a Perfect Circle Freehand

The technique is so simple

lost-at-e-minor_logo

This article originally appeared on Lost at E Minor.

No one thought it was possible. Until now. In the tutorial video below, YouTuber Dave Hax shows us how to draw a perfect circle freehand. The technique is so simple, it’ll make you wonder why no one thought of it before: you use your wrist, knuckles, or fingers as your pivot. From there, you spin the paper around, drawing a perfect circle as you go. It takes a bit of practice, but when you get the hang of it, it feels like unlocking a new skill!

(Via APlus)

Your browser, Internet Explorer 8 or below, is out of date. It has known security flaws and may not display all features of this and other websites.

Learn how to update your browser