Most of the people struck me that way, apart from Marian Goodman and some of the attendees in the New York and London galleries.
His studio seemed factory-like too, except for the cold atonal music I heard playing in the background at one point.
If painting is as moral as Richter claims, shouldn't there be more signs of love, passion and human engagement in the painter's surroundings?
I don't know. I'm just asking the question.
[deleted]
Note that the world I refer to includes both people and the material environment in which Richter works.
For a lighthearted contrast:
http://positivesharing.com/2006/10/10-seeeeeriously-cool-workplaces/
Also:
Picasso:
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Arts/Arts_/Pictures/2009/2/9/12341 74866622/Picasso-in-studio-001.jpg
Dali's studio:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_4rt8ZNTPE3M/ShLb3wM3cwI/AAAAAAAAF_4/hWFWKcaP E3o/s400/ZIMG_7622.JPG
Chagall's:
http://www.egodialogues.com/wp-content/uploads/marc-chagall-studio2.jp g
i think Richter specifically went for this 'cold feeling' in his atelier. i mean the walls are extremely white, so his pictures stand out, bombing the visual mental mind of the spectactor (or Richter himself)
i didn't think the people (like his assistants) were very cold though.
He is just a selling factory. His paintings are nothing but an attempt to sell... Not his fault... These wealthy idiots keep buying and promoting this kind of art. So he smears some plank of wood around and gets rich.
That is just not art. Anyone can do what he does. The difference is, someone made him famous by promoting his work and buying it.