I love Cezanne. Something about his colors and his outlined images, the planes in his landscapes, just speak to me.
Bending the rules a little,
a typical still life:
http://www.artchive.com/artchive/C/cezanne/comptier.jpg.html
A typical landscape:
http://www.modjourn.brown.edu/Image/cezanne/cezanneestaque.jpg
Who Edvard Munch
What The Scream
When 1893
Why For a good chunk of my life, I felt just like the guy in this painting. In fact, in 10th grade, when tasked with combining a poem with a picture to convey a sense of who we were, I paired this painting with T. S. Eliot’s poem, The Hollow Men. I got an A, but the teacher didn’t post my work on the bulletin board with the other kids’. Today I probably would have gotten intervened on. 
I’m a lot better now. Really.
Who: Jean-Baptiste Camille Corot
What: Lago di Piediluco, Umbria.
When: 1826
Where: The Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.
Why: Ah, the hard one. I ran across it, wandering through the Ashmolean one day, and just stood in front of it entranced … it’s so perfectly peaceful a landscape, the symmetry of the calm sky reflected in the smooth surface of the lake … even the shapes of the buildings are smoothed, and blend seamlessly into the landscape as a whole … very calming. (The .jpg in the link doesn’t really do it justice … looks a bit grey and dingy compared to the real thing).
Who: Magritte
What: Pleasure
When: 1927
Where: Kunstsammlung Nordhein-Wesfalen, Dusseldorf, Germany
Why: This is one of my current favorites. I have a postcard of this that I hadn’t looked at for years and suddenly it appealed to me. It’s surrealism, which definitely lends itself to personal analysis. How does “pleasure” relate to the image? Is the girl in pleasure eating this bird alive? Is it that she enjoys the birds so much, that she must consume one to fully enjoy it? As Magritte was fond of multiple meanings, and in reflecting upon “The Treason of Pictures”, I think he might have been saying, We might get pleasure from looking at something pretty, like birds, or this painting, and we can consume it visually, but we certainly cannot eat it. And there’s the irony, the girl is consuming the bird, and we are consuming the image of the girl and the birds. For many I would assume this painting is not pleasurable to look at, which is another level of irony.
I have to pick one? How about three? 
#1 - The Marc Chagall blue stained-glass windows in the Stephanskirche in Mainz, Germany. Imagine my delight when I stepped inside: windows by my favorite painter in my favorite color; I felt like a fish must feel when the sun first comes up in the morning.
You can see a picture I took here, but it doesn’t do the place justice: Vacation and Hotel Reviews, Travel Photos and Pictures, Travel Deals - IgoUgo
#2 - Diego Rivera’s “Detroit Industry” murals at the Detroit Institute of Arts (http://www.dia.org/rivera/infoidx.htm?). I could sit and look at these for hours - there’s so many little details to pick out and so much to soak in.
“The murals are a tribute to Detroit industry in the 1930s. It is one of the few major modern works to successfully incorporate representations of functional machines. Rivera transformed their physical power and practical design into dynamic images and sensual forms.”
#3 - I can’t remember what the name of the work is or who made it, but in the Kunstmuseum Bonn in Bonn, Germany, there’s a sculpture that has a sheet of dull metal running down the middle of it with puddles of mercury on top of the metal. Whenever someone walks nearby and makes the floor vibrate, the mercury quivers and separates for a few moments before joining back together, and it’s absolutely fascinating to watch. I walked all around it and watched it move, grinning like a little kid, for several minutes before I tore myself away.
I don’t think I can chose just one.
#1
Who: Caravaggio
What:Entombment of Christ
When: 1604
Where: Museei Vaticani, Pinacoteca, Rome
Why: Click on the image to enlarge it…it is so descriptive, every person portrayed and so lifelike. It looks to me to be a snapshot in a very busy scene, it gives me a feeling of such action, though the use of light and dark. Each person is very real looking, wrinkles, bad complexions and all. I will add that I am an atheist but am still drawn to religious art. This painting…uhhh. It just hits me. It is fabulous.
#2
Who: Donatello
What: St. Mark
When: 1411-1413
Where: Florence
Why: I have to chose at least one statue. I love it. Again, click on the picture to enlarge it. It looks as if St. Mark will walk right off that platform. His clothes fall perfectly based on how he is standing, which also seems such a natural pose. This was done in marble and stands 7’9". I’d love to see it in person. Amazing.
#3
Who: Leonardo & Cesare de Sesto
What:Leda and the Swan
Where: Wilton House, Salsbury, UK
When: this copy after 1515
Why: First let me say that from what I can tell this is actually by Cesare de Sesto, and is a copy of the lost Leda and the Swan by Leonardo. This is just erotic to me and I get sensual feelings when I look at it. That is the main reason I love it. Castor and Pollux are the famous twins who hatch from their union. The swan is Zeus who fell in love with Leda and came to her in this form. The look on her face is modest but alluring.
Honorable mention: (prints I have hanging in my home)
Who: John W. Waterhouse
What: The Awakening of Adonis
Another sensual one.
Who: Sandro Botticelli
What:The Birth of Venus
Pure fun fantasy. Love it.
Who: Raphael
What:The School of Athens
This is inspiring to me. It is all the greats according to Raphael, all linked together, though separated by 2000 years. It brings to mind creativity, perfection and principles. Also that is a cool site. It links to clickable pics of who the different philosophers are that Raphael painted. I love it that he put himself in there, peeking behind someone else.
Sorry I did so many. I couldn’t resist! I am an art lover and didn’t even know it until I hit about 30 years old. I love art museums and arcitecture and ‘getting the chills’ when I see something special. It is such a visceral feeling sometimes.
Great thread. I’ve learned a lot from it so far.
way too many to list, but here are two favorites that are sort of related
Who: Robert Motherwell
What: Elegy to the Spanish Republic, No. 110, Easter Day
When: 1971
Where: Guggenheim Museum, NYC
Why: Motherwell is my favorite ab-ex painter, because he always struck me as the most poetic. I find I really respond to the zen-like simplicity in this painting. The series of Elegies occupied Motherwell for 40 years, and he produced something like 200 paintings with this title, or similar. The tragedy of the Spanish Civil War becomes a metaphor for all injustice, and this painting captures the deep pain of it with a howl of black paint. I adore this work.
Who: Pablo Picasso
What: Guernica
When: 1937
Where: Reina Sofia, Madrid, Spain
Why: As in Motherwell’s painting, this work was produced in response to the Spanish Civil War, in particular, Hitler’s bombing of a small Basque village on behalf of Franco. Guernica was pounded for three hours, and burned for days. The painting was created for the Spanish Pavilion for the 1937 World’s Fair in Paris, and was installed not far from Speer’s monolith to Nazi Germany. After the Paris Exposition, Guernica toured Europe and North America to raise consciousness about the threat of Fascism. It was later housed in a temporary home at MoMA in NYC, and was only returned to Spain on the centenary of Picasso’s birth, October 25th, 1981 (Franco had died in 1975).
In 1986 I saw this painting in Madrid, and was struck by the hush of the room, the grandmothers leaning down and whispering to their grandchildren as the kids looked up at it, wide-eyed and frightened of what had once happened.
here’s another link to a better image, but without the background info in the prior link: Guernica
I really like The Scream and Persistence of Memory (a poster of which is on the wall above this computer). And there have been a bunch of other great entries here, most of which, as a non art-type, I hadn’t seen before.
But I notice nobody’s mentioned Picasso’s Guernica (1937) yet. It’s terrible and violent, but you can’t help being struck by this thing.
If you like art with an astronomy theme the artist Kim Poor is my favorite.
One of his works Ladies of the Lake enchants me.
I don’t have a single favorite, but this one is among the top contenders.
What: Laocoön and His Sons
Who: Agesander, Athenedoros, & Polydorus
When: circa 20 BC
Where: Vatican Museum
Why: I saw this one in person at the Vatican Museum and found it incredibly moving. The looks of anguish on their faces are so real. The story it tells (the Greek gods sent sea serpents to strangle them for trying to warn the Trojans about the wooden horse) provokes thoughts of the larger, epic story. And the statue itself has an interesting story, summarized here.
Artist: Alexander Archipenko
Title: “Woman Combing her hair”.
http://www.picassomio.com/art/12749/en
There are many paintings with this title, but this is a sculpture - one which I have always liked. The style is organic and definitely expresses a feminine quality.
As for the other posters I like Edward Hopper’s painting “Gas” which I had never seen before. The SDMB has made me climb one more rung up the ladder of cultural knowledge.
As for other paintings already mentioned, I have always liked “Persistence of Memory” (Dali), “Wheatfield With Crows” (VanGogh), and just about anything by MC Escher.
What: Relativity
Who: Escher
When: 1953
Why: I’m no art critic. I don’t really understand how one judges a work of art, and I view trying to find some kind of inner meaning in one as the long essay your evil art history teacher makes you write. I like this painting simply because it looks cool.
http://www.lipsons.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/escher/relativity.html
(the first pic is a Lego version, but you can see the actual painting if you scroll down)
What: Looking Along Broadway Towards Grace Church
Who: Red Grooms (USA artist, b. 1927)
When: 1981
Where: Cleveland Museum of Art, Ohio
Why: I used to live in Cleveland, and fondly remember this work from my visits to the museum. As you might expect, the picture hardly does the “sculptural environment” justice – you have to walk around the work to fully appreciate it, and you’ll find some neat new detail on each return viewing. Vehicles, signs, the varied denizens of an urban landscape – all combine to reproduce the cacophony and jumble of city life in a manner at once realistic, idealized, and overwhelming. Memory from one day when I was about 25 years old: A young boy who seemed to have been dragged to the museum by his parents for a “dose of culture” appeared to have been trudging resignedly through the galleries when he came upon this work. Suddenly, his eyes lit up as he exclaimed: “I LOVE it!”
You said there are no rules?
Okay:
What: La Passion d’Jeanne D’Arc
Who: Carl Theodore Dreyer
When: 1928
Where: Your local eclectic film outlet. Better yet, Amazon.com, Criterion Collection edition.
Why: My favorite film of all time, certainly one of the greatest, if not the greatest film ever made, no words can adequately describe its beauty and power. French filmmaker and critic Jean Cocteau described it once as “an historical document from an era in which the cinema didn’t exist.” Telling the story of Joan’s trial, torture and execution, the film culminates in a frenetic and moving climax, intercutting Joan’s broken body being burned alive and the guards turning viciously on the angry mob at the execution. There is no scenery, nor are there any sweeping shots. The film is shot entirely in close-ups, forging an emotional connection between the audience and Joan and her tormentors. The film is cold, brutal, emotionally draining and features the best performance ever recorded on film, from Maria Falconetti as Joan.
I LOVE this thread.
Heh. My company has a specially commissioned location-specific Steadman painted right on the wall just off the main lobby of one of its buildings. Most people think it’s just “weird.” I love it and frequently find reasons to take a detour past it. I fear the day the corporate suits get fed up with their confusion and paint over the vaguely disturbing image.
I agree, completely (and a nod also to mrunlucky who named another favorite). Which is why I’m nominating…
Who: Rene Magritte (1898-1967)
What: Le viol (i.e. “the violation,” almost invariably translated as “The Rape”)
When: 1934 (though there are multiple versions)
Where: Per the above link, possibly the Metropolitan Museum, though it’s hard to tell; lots of contradictory links (possibly referencing the various versions)
Why: There’s about forty different things going on in this work. Objectively, it’s just a simple combination of two image elements. But this ostensibly straightforward juxtaposition, combined with a highly provocative and yet ambiguous title, creates profound unease in the viewer, though why, exactly, cannot exactly be pinned down.
For me, personally, this work exemplifies two major aspects of what I consider masterful art: First, it balances a cool, dispassionate intellectualism with a brute-force raw emotionality, inextricably tangling the rational and the irrational, an essential tension that I find thrilling. (The matter-of-fact mixed with the grotesque is seen also in the image linked by mrunlucky.) And second, no matter how you look at it, in the end, the painting’s meaning not only can be but must be determined far more by the viewer than by the pure content of the canvas. Because it can be interpreted in so many different ways (is it a representation of how a woman feels after a rape? or is the image a representation of how men look at women, with this casual objectification representing daily ongoing emotional rape? and if it’s the latter, how does this idea of being looked at relate to the fact that we the viewers are looking at the painting and imposing our perceptions and opinions on it?), what you feel and you come away with says a helluva lot more about you than it does about the painting.
Mmm, perhaps that’s the source of the unease in the typical person’s response: subconsciously, we know we have to take responsibility for what we find, and we cannot glibly blame the painting for making us feel what we feel. The work hands us a barbed hook; we choose where it gets lodged.
Anyway, again, I love this thread. Please keep 'em coming.
Okay, following gobear’s lead:
Who: Tohaku Hasegawa
What: Shorin-zu Byobu (Pine Trees) The whole thing.
Left side, center, right side.
When: 1594
Where: Tokyo National Museum
Why: This is one of the most famous, if not the most famous Japanese ink painting. There is so much in this painting that’s not strictly on the pannels themselves. Hasegawa only drew what he absolutely needed to and his worker is all the richer for that. If you look at the close-ups, you can see that the tree trunks are actually only a single brush stroke. This is the ultimate example of virtuosity to the service of a genuine and profound vision. Like all great art IMO, it says so much by showing so little.
My second contribution is hardly original. However, like the Mona Lisa, you have to learn to look past the cliché to really appreciate what made it famous in the first place.
Who: Unknown
What: Stone garden of Ryoan-ji.
When: 1499 (maybe)
Where: Ryoan-ji Temple, Kyoto, Japan
Why: This is the ultimate piece of abstract art. Again there is a great economy displayed here. It’s anything but ostentatious. The composition is perfect, but it’s hard to understand why one can’t help feel that way. This is a living, breathing piece that ultimately shines by showing whatever you brought along with you. It is both personal and public, open - it uses the nearby mountains - and also deeply introspective.
Who: Gerhard Richter
What: Lesende
Where: San Francisco MOMA
When: 1994
Why: I don’t know, just look at it, it’s beautiful. The lighting and the pose with the deep reds. I love all of Richter’s works, but this one is my favorite.
I’m going to cheat and add another favorite:
Who: Henry O. Tanner
What: The Banjo Lesson
Where: Hampton University Museum, Hampton, VA
When: 1893
Why: I can’t explain it. Just look.
Who: Paul Signac
What: Portrait of Félix Fénéon
When: 1890
Why: I had never been a fan of pointillism, but I completely fell in love with this piece when I first saw it. I love how the man seems completley unaware of all the colors around pulsing around him, and the way he holds the lily just so… I just think it is really beautiful.
Who: Antonio Gaudi
What: http://www.xtrovertmedia.se/gaudi/bildgalleri/galleri.html
"]Temple Expiatori de la Sagrada Familia
Where: Barcelona, Spain
When: 1882 to 1926 (and continuing construction today)
Why: It’s not a painting, but the whole building is one magnificent sculpture. It looks so ugly from a distance, but up close, every single element of it is entrancing, beatiful, striking, emotional… I was in awe. I can’t wait to go back and experience it again.
