Comments on: Guernica, Veiled

By: Joe Sims

Joe Sims — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 04:04:36 +0000

Picasso? Are you sure this isn’t one of those Magic Eye posters of a schooner?

By: Jim M

Jim M — Wed, 05 Feb 2003 01:45:01 +0000

Well, Now that I know what it’s supposed to be I still can’t see it.

Wait…Wait a minute…

Nope. I still don’t see it.

By: Bobby

Bobby — Tue, 04 Feb 2003 17:57:05 +0000

The title suggests the meaning in this case. Guernica (the city) was fire bombed by the fascists in the Spanish Civil War. I think it would be the perfect back drop for making the case for taking out Saddam. This could just as easily be a depiction of the gassing of the Kurds in ‘88. It could also be a prophetic vision of what is to come in this country if we don’t confront those who would use weapons of mass destruction on us.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 04 Feb 2003 17:26:51 +0000

I see the Oregon Trail, with articial light like those annoying florecents in school.

By: Shotwell

Shotwell — Tue, 04 Feb 2003 17:15:06 +0000

What you see is what you get. I’m sure Picasso would have been thrilled to know that his painting offended somone. After all isn’t that the intent?

By: Jason Nelms

Jason Nelms — Tue, 04 Feb 2003 16:10:59 +0000

I thought it was an orgy at Hedonism II.

By: fangsign

fangsign — Tue, 04 Feb 2003 15:54:03 +0000

Well, I see a cow/bull in the background so I think it’s about the horrors of mad cow disease.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 04 Feb 2003 15:31:54 +0000

Roger, you are right. I always thought it was a depiction of Hades.

By: roger

roger — Tue, 04 Feb 2003 13:27:47 +0000

The funny thing is, if I hadn’t been told that the painting depicted the agony of war, I wouldn’t have known it by glancing at it.

It clearly shows agony of some sort, but that’s about all I can see. For all I know, he could be depicting the horrors of food poisoning, which, of course, can be pretty horrible.

Picasso had some great works, but they weren’t always very easy to determine the subject on your own. Interpretation is quite a bit easier when someone guides you to a conclusion.

Believe me, most people, even if they could clearly see the painting in the background, would have no idea what it depicts.

By: chris

chris — Tue, 04 Feb 2003 13:05:46 +0000

Picasso is still my favorite. Besides, what does the UN know about free speach?

By: James

James — Tue, 04 Feb 2003 13:00:57 +0000

“It is an appropriate background for the cameras.”

Wasn’t this the same rationale for the Justice Dept’s curtain purchase last year?

Funny that no one seemed to feel this was necessary over the past decade or few that such press conferences have been happening.

Is there some reason these people can not find another place to do TV press conferences?

And just why is it that we viewers must be presented with a blue background everytime anyway?

By: Frank N

Frank N — Tue, 04 Feb 2003 11:10:34 +0000

If we stopped the current armed intervention in Iraq of the “no-fly” zones, then Saddam would start slaughtering the Kurds, then Guernica would be appropriate and all the Susan Sarandon’s of the world can feel better that we are no longer in Iraq.