Tamara de Lempicka is still un-understandably shunned by the art establishment. She never had a proper retrospective show in Paris as she would rightfully deserve. This is a nice 2004 BBC program hosted by Andrew Graham Dixon.

Comments

1. who knows the song in this video plz tell me what is its name plzzzzzz
2. Thanks for video.
   Madonna's love for the works of Tamara de Lempicka is also underlined by its music video "VOGUE", where you can see several paintings by the artist.
3. Brilliant.
4. The music degrades this painter...had to stop watching (((
5. Should be pronounciate "Lempitska" and she was a Polish Art Deco painter, not Russian. She was born as Maria Górska in Warsaw, Congress Poland under the rulership of the Russian Empire, into a wealthy and prominent family
6. I think it's ironic that several talking airheads in this trashy "documentary" derided Lempicka as superficial and shallow, while they themselves were guilty of exactly that.
   I do agree that her attempts with abstract art sucked a fair amount of ass, though. But abstract isn't a movement I'm all that into, anyway. Most of it is redundant and boring, far less interesting than 5th grade art. And 5th grade artworks are at least is genuine. I have a coffee table book of Lempicka's work and was very disappointed by that section. It's always sad to see someone with talent and vision kowtow to whatever crap happens to be popular in an attempt to remain or regain relevance. 
   But I totally disagree with the criticism of her portraits of "the poor" that the narrator guy offered, rather unnesseccarily, in fact. And what she was quoted as saying about how poor people are the only innocents left seems to have been misunderstood because I didn't find it condescending at all, and I'm one of those she supposedly would have been condescending toward, according to the pretentious host. Did this woman not have first hand knowledge of how a wealthy, decadent lifestyle can corrupt a person?
   Well, I'm making less and less sense as I go on. It's late, I'm tired, and I'm poor and uneducated! I shouldn't even be saying anything when we have such illustrious assholes in the world of art criticism to do the talking.
   I am an artist, and though I've been pretty inactive for several years, I still do occasionally paint or draw and I've still got ideas flooding my mind as I lay in bed awaiting sleep, some of which are so good I remember details enough that if I wasn't so depressed and demoralized by boredom I'd be able to put them on canvas even though it's been years after some of the aforementioned ideas came into being. My art might very well be dismissed as superficial by art critics because I love to paint beautiful women, usually naked. I'm sure they would also deem it misogynistic because I sometimes have the ladies brandishing sex appeal and sexual organs along with a severed finger or leg or head every now and then. Then there would be plenty of critics who see my secret language of symbolic accoutrements and colors as schlocky or passé, despite not having any idea of what they mean to me.
   None of the above will happen because I have never made my art for anybody but myself. I don't care to impress anybody but a few in my personal life, I have no desire whatsoever to comment on current events and I am of the opinion that the vast majority of artists WHO DO are the superficial ones. It's sad and frustrating that the Art World (Ths Art Market) isn't interested in beauty and individuality. It demands that certain criteria be met and stifles true creativity and individuality. What a crock of horseshit.
   Oh and one more thing! Most of the people in this documentary came off as stupid and phony as fuck! I felt my IQ, not exactly high to begin with, dip into the depths as these educated idiots droned on and on. Superficial INDEED!
7. La extrema elegancia sensibilidad y técnica
8. Love these videos but please change tailors that suit does zero for you my dear ,,,,
9. To all the glamour struck simpletons who whine about the program - only a pathetic superficial snob wouldn't see that her mediocre "art" doesn't have more value than the label on a can of cream for hemorrhoids.
10. Her name is more properly pronounced Lempeetzka. I would have expected this presenter to know this.
11. Hmmm. Critics think her work is 'banal' - yet I guess they think that Picasso's disfigured kindergarten slop and Pollack's squirts on canvas is what shows real talent and vision? Give me a freaking break.
12. What an awful documentary BBC!! Tamara de Lampicka deserves a lot more credit than your stuck up pompous oratory offers!!!
13. Tamara De Lempicka was a MAGNIFICENT ARTIST whose work is badly neglected and I suspect it's for two reasons: 1. The Male art historians just plain ignore her because when it comes to Art Deco, they mostly focus on the architecture. 2. Feminist Art historians ignore her because she's not the "kind" of role model they like to champion: they would rather focus on Frida Kahlo, who was exploited BY the men in her life, rather than Tamara who USED men. It's a sorry state and it reveals how BIAS can badly affect who does or who DOESN'T get recognized in Art History!