NOT TOTALLY FORGOTTEN

AP and CNN mention Paul Klee. Decent article, actually. I once read a bluffer's guide that recommended invoking Klee's name to defang art snobs on the grounds that 1) he was good, 2) his style is not easily pigeonholed, and 3) not many people know much about him.

[I've never heard anyone say anything less than wonderful about Klee. But more to the point, he was particularly not forgotten in San Francisco, where you missed a nice show of his work at SF MOMA recently, didn't you, Dr. X, didn't you? ]

[Not to dodge the question, but despite his obvious talent and considerable reputation, I never got Paul Klee, though I'm coming around now (Seiltanzer was step one in my conversion). Klee's problem is threefold, in my opinion. First, his interest in the child-like runs counter to our traditional artistic focus on suffering, sex and death. Second, his work doesn't market itself that well - I've never seen a Klee that would make a good album cover (Picasso and Matisse avoided this error). Finally, Klee has been ill-served by generations of imitators whose work looks roughly like this but isn't nearly as good. - Dr. X ]

[1. What is an "album cover?" 2. Suffering, sex, and death is the decoration on a 13th century cathedral. 3. Bad imitators is a sure sign of triumph.-PWP]