The comments are, by and large, the comments

Take a look at these two paintings:



The left image is a painting ("Portrait of Pope Innocent X") by Diego Velazquez, a Spanish painter. He was a masterful realist during the Baroque period. The right image is a painting by English modernist Francis Bacon ("Study after Velazquez's Portrait of Pope Innocent X").

I wouldn't bring it up except that of the three comments on the most recent piece about Big Jimmy on Dealbreaker that caught my attention, someone wrote the following:

It's like Francis Bacon's Innocent X, with a thousand inner voices driving, or representing, his insanity.

Perfect.

Since everybody knows that Francis Bacon is maybe the coolest painter ever, this seems like high praise to me. You can't let this stuff go to your head, though. After all, somebody else wrote:

Jerry Springer on acid.

So there are a couple of perspectives. The comments are, by and large, the comments.

What it does speak to is this:



That is to say, the legitimacy of taking famous images and reinterpreting them. It is, of course, my "Portrait of the Portrait of Gertrude Stein."

The last comment?

How does that dude feel about her blowing his entire severance package on one painting?

I got the impression that his severance package might have exceeded the purchase price.