I looked it up and it's called At the table (French girl) and is by Louis Ritman and is from 1918. Now you know.
I’ve also included the Picasso and the Matisse. The Matisse is the cartoon looking one in bold primary colors of a person facing right. It doesn’t look well painted and makes me feel nothing. It and the Picasso are included because they’re famous, not because I consider them good. Oh, I’m sure the art world is correct in that they ARE good, but I don’t like either of them. They leave me feeling as hollow inside when I look at them, as Chinese food leaves me hungry half an hour later. This is a common problem with me and "great" art. I don't understand it. A painting doesn't have to be super real for me, that's what photographs are for. But, for me to appreciate it as more than just "meh" it has to be something or look like something that took skill and not something that looks like something I could have done myself. "Oh, Rich, but you didn't and that's the difference!" Yes, well. The reason for that is if/when I have done I wouldn't show anyone. I certainly wouldn't try and sell anything I did that looked like the Matisse on the right. Seriously, look at the sausage fingers there. No. That's not something I understand. My short-coming I'm sure, but not for me.
Des Moines Art Center and that's actually pretty cool. That being said...
Just because I recognized it, and recognize his work doesn't mean I'm able to appreciate it however. Yes, I know this is his. I know he did it on purpose. I don't know why though. I'll just leave it here rather than continue showing my ignorance. This isn't meant to be a screed against non-realism.
I’d considered a train vacation like a land cruise where I got on the train and went out three days, turned around and came back. It would have been all motion, all travel, all me moving through time and space and no being stationary or in one place and it would have been fantastic... except the train schedule was such that I’d mostly be doing it all at night. For most people travel is like it is for the two people in the art installation and it’s a drudgery, a terrible pause between being where you wanted to be but had to leave, and being where you want to go but aren’t there yet. It’s like a commercial break full of bad jingles. I don’t feel about travel that way, but lots of people do. So, for them, a train ride that was 27 hours of night out of the 36 hours of the trip would be fantastic, They could sleep it all away. For me? It was enough to cancel the trip. I don't want to miss the movement. That’s the whole point.
Trash as art was done in 2017 at Reiman Gardens. It was well presented and some work and creativity went into it. Did I like it? Not as art, no. But I respected the time and effort that went into doing it. I enjoyed looking at it. I enjoyed the discovery of seeing it and watching the swordfish resolve itself into the detritus of life as I got closer. That I liked. I DO think the whole "trash as art" thing is overdone though. It's just lazy at this point.