After having seen Demoiselle d'avignon a first time and not having really gotten a lot out of it, it was helpful to go see it a second time after our class discussion, where everything finally was clear to me. I must say that it is a perplexing concept to grasp, the idea that a painting is made to point out that depth cannot be shown on a canvas. However, at the same time, the painting also seems to hint of depth itself, otherwise how could a woman's hand be behind her back or how could she be facing sidewards without there being another side of her beyond that? It seems to me that Picasso was also trying to convey his point in an ironic way; he is trying to show flatness but at the same time this painting still has depth. Furthermore, I also noticed how the painting could be viewed from different angles: from the top as if the women were laying down, or vertically, as if the women were standing up. This is because the background of the painting is very obscure, one cannot tell if it is the sky, a curtain, or if its just a space Picasso decided to place these women so that we are able to see them more as separate entities in different spaces rather than together. They really don't seem to be aware of the other's presence, only aware of the presence of those watching them, or rather, those who they are watching. After having been working on our second paper, it is very intriguing to me to watch how artists take their art form to the modernistic levels by defying all the norms previously accepted and practiced by all artists. And it seems to me that both Morris and Picasso were ironic in the manner that they did this because both still incorporated ideas in their work from the original art form. I must say, that I've definitely seen my growth in being able to interpret and understand art in a way I really thought was not possible. It's a really rewarding experience. 

The rest of the Moma exhibits were also incredible. =]