# data[].attributes.body
Joan Miro and Lucio Fontana

Lucio Fontana art was more expensive than Joan Miro. Lucio Fontana is more in to spatialism style and Miro is in to surrealism style. Lucio Fontana is much more minimalistic and does not use color. When he does use color, its only 1 bold color for the entire painting. There is very little going on in his paintings. They are very unique, I have never seen anything like it but it does lead me to have a lot of questions I wish to ask the artist. Joan Miro seems to me more creative. Everything he does is big, colorful, bright, and looks a bit childish which I like a lot. He uses a lot of random shapes, mostly curvy ones but Lucio Fontana uses straight lines. I feel like there is a lot to say about Joan Miro’s art but apparently Lucio Fontana is more popular. I find it hard to think both artist lived in the same times because their styles are complete opposite. I can see how Lucio Fontana work had a bigger impact on the art world because it’s so new. It’s extremely original and might have inspired others to do something as unique. By causing confusion, I feel like Lucio Fontana can trick people in thinking his art has deeper meaning and should be worth more. I still think Joan Miro is not credited enough, because his work to me looks much more complicated and harder to do. That doesn’t mean its better, but all these colors and shapes are a different kind of abstract. His art brings me back to my childhood, its like its telling me a story I already know but have actually never heard. That sounds crazy but his art brings so many more thoughts to my brain and inspiration than a couple lines in a canvas. Colors are known to inspire, complicated shapes mean different things to different people and so I feel smarted after looking at “Danseuses acrobates” rather than “Concetto spaziale, Attesa” .

# data[].attributes.body
Joan Miro 'Birth of the world'

I think Joan Miro's work is more expensive, bears more impact on the art world and beyond, while also speaks to more people. I also think its more labor intensive. More actual work than Fontana. But this particular painting speaks to me. As an environmentalist and activist, sometimes a pessimist, the birth of the world speaks to me as in birth of the NEW world. Not in the creation story, or the Big Bang theory, his painting to me, depicts the discovery of electricity by ben Franklin. I see the discovery of electricity and the birth of the modern world. With that discovery, science, industrialization, and the modern world was thrusted forward. But also, inevitably may be the downfall of our civilization. It's gloomy imagery and dark distress in the painting, depicts terror and the downfall of our existence. Yes we live healthier, longer, and better lives, but we did so irresponsibly and I interpret this painting in a way, I see our world.

# data[].attributes.body
Lucio Fontana 'Spatial concept' Copper

I enjoy Fontana's work more than I do Joan Miró. They both created their work around the same time but as an interior designer, I feel as if Fontana's work speaks to me. It's interesting in the way he creates slices within the painting. I dont think this is the most labor intensive work, but it involves more conceptual thought and meandering. Something that I also love to do. Take one step forward and two steps back. Conceptually, it's how I work. I get an idea, start, and just invest my time in thought and contemplation more than actual work.

# data[].attributes.body
Lucio Fontana
Concetto Spaziale, Attese (1965)
Water paint on canvas

# data[].attributes.body
Both Lucio Fontana and Joan Miro were influential artist at af very difficult time in history where turmoil and war were were palpable. They both had their personal (and opposite) political ideologies and these translated into their art.  In terms of labor and spectacle, I find it hard to compare the two because they each had to study their process before producing the actual piece and you could argue that both artists worked just as hard even though they were different methods. Lucio Fontana for example, had to study how the canvas reacted to different cutting instruments and you can see an evolution in his technique. Joan Miro, studied shapes, and the abstraction of the human figure, it’s hard to quantity the amount of hours he spent sketching and perfecting a piece before it became final. In today’s market, both artists are greatly successful as far as selling for very high prices, Lucio Fontana’s selling record for one piece is $29 million, similarly, Joan Miró’s most expensive painting sold for $36 million. In my opinion Miró is much more recognized today, maybe it’s the intricacy of his art, paired with some enigma and mystique in his creations.

# data[].attributes.body
LUCIO FONTANA

# data[].attributes.body
Joan Miro and Lucio Fontana both lived around the same period of time and were both very influential to the art world.For you question about who had more impact on the art world and beyond I am quite not sure due to the fact that both great artist were influential in different aspects. Lucio Fontana was getting to know the new way of modern art. In Italy the were aware of the futurism and he was greatly influenced by technology. These aspects make Lucio Fontana greatly influential in the art industry. However the fact that Joan Miros art was a sort of protest against the leaders was very influential to the art world and beyond. Lucio compared to the Joan was actually working for the leaders even tho he was not very happy with the system. Joan Miro answered that very had question about morals or money in my opinion witch is a very hard ethical dilemma even for young artist as well as ourselves.
In the art marker after a online research Lucio Fontana's work is relatively more expensive and widely circulated.This might be due to his legacy and the way he got into art and his father.
JOAN MIRO

# data[].attributes.body
They both influenced the art world. Their artworks are very expensive. Joan Miro and Lucio Fontana thought about the space and object on the canvas. Joan tried to add something on it. That is why his works were becoming 3 dimensional. However, Lucio was focusing on ‘subtracting’. I think he wanted us to see the negative space or beyond the space from his art. I also really admire Joan because he never satisfied his style and kept studying a different kind of styles. His passion for art inspired me a lot.

# data[].attributes.body
Dingjie Zhuo

I chose Jona Miro's The Table (still life and Rabbite), and Lucio Fontana's Concetto spaziale, Attese. Base their work, I think Fontana is a minimalist artist, and Miro's work is very surreal and complicated. According to my online search, Fontana's work is more expensive, and his work is more than 20 million US dollars. I think that Fontana's work is more influential and the value of his work is the best proof.

# data[].attributes.body
Joan Miro, Dutch Interior (I) 91.8 x 73cm.  Lucio Fontana, Spatial Concept, The end of God Cocetto Spaziale, La Fine Di Dio. 178 x 123 cm (70.1 x 48.4in)

What’s comparing to Joan Miro and Lucio Fontana, they’re both painters and fine art sculptors.  But for Fontana is more in to spatialism style and Miro is in to surrealism style.

My favorite piece I like from Joan Miro, is the Dutch Interior (I), because I love the colors of the surrealism style.  I think after when Miro visited from Amsterdam or Netherlands, Miro was inspired by the Dutch old classic painting. The Lute Player, Hendrick Martensy Sorgh.  To Miro, he created this painting in to his style of surrealism.  For Lucio Fontana piece, the Spatial Concept, it’s more symbolic to the postwar era.  The hole on the painting are like connection or a passages between the art and the viewer.  The labor of his work, it would take a lot of time to make his own frame and stretch the canvas and have the right tools the punch in the holes.  For Miro it takes time to sketch out the ideas in different shapes and more of a spectacle piece.  To Fontana, it would take him very frustrated to full in the hole in the spectacle piece.  Fontana is more progressive, because experienced beyond the traditionally painting.
The pricing of Fontanas pieces is worth $20,000 to $8,000,000.  And for Miros pieces they're worth $3,000 to $20,000. Which means Fontana is worth more then Miro.

# data[].attributes.headline
Yuelin wu.                                                                                                       Lucio Fontana  19 February 1899 – 7 September 1968) was an Argentine-Italian painter, sculptor and theorist. He is mostly known as the founder of Spatialism.

# data[].attributes.subject
Yuelin wu.                                                                                                       Lucio Fontana  19 February 1899 – 7 September 1968) was an Argentine-Italian painter, sculptor and theorist. He is mostly known as the founder of Spatialism.

# data[].attributes.body
Joan Miró i Ferrà 20 April 1893 – 25 December 1983) was a Spanish painter, sculptor, and ceramicist born in Barcelona. A museum dedicated to his work, the Fundació Joan Miró, was established in his native city of Barcelona in 1975, and another, the Fundació Pilar i Joan Miró, was established in his adoptive city of Palma de Mallorca in 1981.
comparing to Joan Miro and Lucio Fontana, they’re both painters and fine art sculptors. They are both creating, but I think Juan miro artwork is more creative and fun.
the artwork I liked from Joan miro is the family. it was drawn with charcoal, and crayon on flocked paper.
what he said is he made no distinction between painting and poetry. Adopting similar creative teachniques to those of his poet friends. miro developed a vocabulary of visual signs that could be compared to the words. in the drawing of the family it shows a father a mother and young child. it is creative and cute to do his paint like that.

# data[].attributes.body
Joan Miro and Lucio Fontana are both artists who found themselves creating some of the earliest works in a new emerging art style of surrealism and spatialism respectively. Miro was greatly inspired by people such as Vincent Van Gogh as well as french poets and writers which helped him create his unique style of surrealism. Fontana was influenced by abstract painters in France and Italy and from there on developed his work in spatialism.
Both Miro and Fontana have put time and effort into their art works,and although it might not seem it, they do have intentions or a thought process behind their works. In Miro's gallery we saw some of his sketches he did of his finshed work, which shows that he does have a thought process and a vision to his work it is not just random. Although I am not a fan at all of surrealism, I cant say that he put no effort into his work and just painted nonsense. Even when you see how his style develops through out his career, you can see that there is a thought process and that he is always thinking of how to take his art to another level.
Fontana's work is a little more interesting to me, although I am not a big fan of abstract minimalist type of work his thought process and intentions behind his work do interest me. I like the idea he has of making a 2D surface 3D by creating cuts in the canvas and gluing pieces of glass to it as well. I like that he also put a lot of thought into the cuts he makes in canvases, even when it wouldn't appear that he does. The fact that he paid attention to a small detail like putting black gauze on the back of a canvas so the cuts stand out and are more striking is something that a lot of people might over look, or they might not even know that it was an intentional detail. It was also very interesting seeing the changes that his art work went through. When he first started making cuts in canvases they were on a plain white canvas and nothing in the back, then he started gluing glass pieces which I thought looked very pretty when the light hit the glass, and then he went back to just cuts but now they are more refined compared to the first. The cuts are fewer and simple clean lines, as well as adding color to the canvas and the black background makes the art work seem much more elegant.
Although I do like Fontana's work more, I feel as though Miro had more of an impact on the art world because I have seen much more paintings and artists who deal with surrealism than I have seen spatialism. However Fontana's works are sold for much more than Miro's.
This was one of my favorite pieces from Fontana, I love the reflective quality of the moon's outline as well as the color of the glass and it has a very elegant quality to me even with the holes through the canvas it just adds texture to the moon, it would be a perfect piece to put above a fireplace.
The Moon In Venice 1961
Acrylic and glass on canvas

# data[].attributes.body
Joan Miro and Lucio Fontana were two very influential artists of their time period.

Fontana was commonly named the creator of Spatialism. Spatialism is a concept created to create and understand  how color, sound, movement, and time interact and stand alone in art. In his earlier works he dabbled in sculpture to study the human form and grasp art in a more clear perspective. Reacting to harder times in the world of war and poverty he created artworks utilizing tools to cut and take away from canvas’ to demonstrate this idea of Spatialism. Fontana’s “Expectations” perfectly encompasses his theory of Spatialism. On a square frame canvas he plays with a saturated orange color with a slash in the middle. The slash is deceptive to the eye because it appears to be painted on, although this was a common technique used by the artist. His works are of high value and pop-culturally known.

Joan Miro was a surrealist painter who poetically tackled real world concepts. Surrealism is an Avant Garde movement formulated through the juxtaposition of images. He played with contrasting colors and the art of line work. Miro’s “The Birth of The World” is one of his most famous paintings. Utilizing basic shapes he constructs this idea of the world at creation. In a very surrealist nature, I interrupt this piece as a form of atoms, looking through a microscope to understand the life broken down.

The labor of these artist’s works are very different. Joan Miro’s style is very expressive and unorthodox at times. Lucio Fontana basically destroys his artworks with knives. As a realist painter, I do not appreciate Joan Miro’s style because of his lack of depth in his paintings. I appreciate Lucio’s symbolism and history behind his works/reasonings. I think Lucio’s work has more impact on the world because of his art movement he composed. Spatialism is in all aspects of art and it should be understood and tackled when creating.

# data[].attributes.body
Joan Miro and Lucio Fontana are both artists who created artworks beyond the flat surface. I personally believe that Lucio Fontana’s sculpture took more labor due to the nature of the medium he worked with. For example, the painted bronze sculpture would take up a lot of space and time because of the large scale and metal. Joan Miro on the other hand, created works of art that are much more abstract than Lucio Fontana. Although Lucio Fontana also had works of art that are not realistic or based on realism, such as the slashed paintings. Fontana’s works are much simpler and minimal, straight and direct to the point. His minimalism allow us to appreciate the accuracy and cleanliness of his creations.

I think Miro’s abstract ideas, however, impact the art world more because of how unclear his ideas are. His abstract approaches makes the audience think and wonder about the meaning behind it. People would spend more time trying to understand Miro’s collection. However, Fontana’s works are more expensive and widely circulated in the art market. With some research, Fontana’s works are sold around 20 million while Miros works only around 10 million.

I personally enjoy Fontana's works more because they are simple and clean. If I were a wealthy collector and wanted to decorate my home, I would choose pieces that would easily compliment each other. Since Fontana's work are not too bizarre, they can easily match with one another.

Lucio Fontana

Seated Young Lady
(Signorina Seduta)
1934
Painted Bronze
Museo del Novecento, Milan

# data[].attributes.body
Rope and People, II
Barcelona, March 29, 1935
Oil on cardboard mounted on wood,
with coil of rope

Private Collection

# data[].attributes.body
Joan Miro and Lucio Fontana are both amazing abstract artists who take art to a hole different level. Whilst viewing their unique art it made me ask questions as too what they were thinking at the time of designing their work?, and how their time period felt about them as artists?. As their work is ahead of their time, it made me realize that i couldn't even comprehend some of their work, as the visuals are intense and how some of the paintings are displayed, i thought to myself 'how could an individual look at this art as somehow see it in a different light, or apply it to their own lives'. The art work is heavy and takes some time to look at, but once you have viewed other art from different artists you can start to admire their creativity as they were the start of a new art revolution moving on to a different level of abstract. Whilst view the two artists i was really drawn too Fontana's Spatial Environment in Red Light, as the room was red it made me feel as if I was in my deepest emotions. As this is meant to change your perception of space, it made me think of reality within this world. If one red room can change your perception, then the world we live in must be filled with deceiving lifestyles and fake people. In conclusion both artists brains are abstractly unique and opened my mind to alternate states of conciseness as I stepped into their shoes for a while and saw what great minds produce.

Spatial Environment in Red Light (Ambiente Spaziale a Luce Rossa) 1967-2019
Lucio Fontana.

# data[].attributes.body
Juan Miró and Lucio Fontana are popular artists in their time. However, their styles and concepts are very different from each other. I think the type of art that Fontana represent have more dimensions with very simple lines or scratch.Fontana radically expanded the picture plane into a third dimension. His groundbreaking approach represents a seismic moment for 20th- century art, transforming paintings, sculptures, and objects into new concepts of space and experimental environments,” said Max Hollein, Director of The Met. “A witness to the historical, cultural, and technological developments that defined the postwar period, his work reflects the influence of a wide range of styles from art history and an irreverence towards hierarchies and convention. in my opinion, is very hard to see what the artist tries show in his work. On the other hand, Miró painting and concepts are more surreal, bizarre. We can see or guess some of the shape in his painting. with very exuberant forms, and interweaving of visual and verbal motifs epitomize the fluid exchange between painting and poetry in Miro work. Strangely anthropomorphic birds float against a washy blue background.

"Hirondelle Amour"
Barcelona late fall 1933-winter 1934 oil on canvas
Moma, NY.

# data[].attributes.body
Portrait of a Man in a Late Nineteenth-Century Frame

Joan Miro

1950

Medium : Oil on canvas with wood frame
Dimensions : 57 1/2 x 49 1/4" (146 x 125 cm) including frame

# data[].attributes.body
Fontana and Miro are alike in the way that they made abstract and futuristic arts. However, it looks like Fontana focused on utilizing material as canvas itself  art as 'True fine art', . On the other hand, Miro gave more importance to 2D art as abstract painting and collages. I could see Miro's works more appeals to public in point that Miro's works are polished and some sort of 'Pop art alike looking(?).
Many of Fontana's art pieces looked as that he just slashed and crushed materials. (Remember those slashed canvas) I didn't really see many artworks needed artistic techniques like fine sculpture or well depicted and detailed painting so it's hard to tell his works were laborious.
Not like rough arts of Fontana, Miro's art pieces are more polished, modern and colorful also, witty and playful in some point.  His paintings are neat and many of them has giant scale so I think those are more laborious than Fontana's works.
In general, Miro has much more well known and impact on public than Fontana, therefore, Miro's art pieces is relatively more expensive.
I personally prefer Miro's work better but I also appreciate artists like Fontana who pursuits truly creative art.

I Am a Saint (Io Sono un Santo)
Artist: Lucio Fontana (Italian, 1899–1968)

Date: 1958

Medium: Ink on paper on canvas with cuts

Dimensions:

19 11/16 × 25 9/16 in. (50 × 65 cm)

Classification: Works on Paper

# data[].attributes.body
Miro, Portrait of Enric Cristofol Ricart, 1917, Oil and pasted paper on canvas, 32 1/8 x 25 7/8" (81.6 x 65.7 cm)

# data[].attributes.body
Lucio Fontana, Portrait of Milena Milani, 1952, glazed ceramic

Just as a surface level answer to the question of whose work has had more impact on the art world, I had never heard of Lucio Fontana, but I'd definitely heard of Joan Miro. That's obviously not a comprehensive or rigorous metric, but I think it is sort of in line with the broader picture, which is that Joan Miro was more widely and internationally celebrated during his life than Fontana was, probably because of Fontana's association with the fascist Italian government during world war II. But that being said, his spatial concepts certainly challenged established perceptions of the picture plane, something that I think has had a dramatic impact on modern art. Miro's surrealism has also certainly had an impact, but I don't know if it is quite as unique as Fontana's spatial work. So I might actually lean towards saying Fontana's work is more substantial and impactful in some ways. His process was a more dramatic break from past convention, and so specifically in relation to labor and spectacle, I think his work is more impactful.

In terms of whose work was more expensive and widely circulated, I would say that that would be Miro. I did some quick searching for the prices of both of their works (current and past sales) and it seemed like Miro's works were much more expensive. This is again in line with my general name recognition of the two artists - I think most people familiar with art have at least heard of Miro, and while I think I may have seen some of Fontana's work before, I didn't know anything about the artist.

# data[].attributes.body
"Hirondelle Amour” by Joan Miro. The painting is a oil on canvas and its size is 6'6 1/2 by 8'1 1/2

# data[].attributes.body
Lucio Fontana and Joan Miro are considerably different both in life and work but not in the context of time. Fontana was born poor in Argentina and educated in Italy. He is credited to be the founder of Spatialism. I feel his artwork is very expressive of the violence and hardship the world was facing based on the physical creation of his art even though it was not laborious and did not need a lot of time or thought for execution. I think that perhaps the reasoning for the physicality in his art and how it could not be anticipated is because of the role that Fontana took by accepting commissions from the fascist movement despite not having any other option.

Joan Miro’s was born in Spain and creates abstract surrealism art reminiscent of Picasso. Joan Miro unlike Lucio Fontana distanced himself from the horror of the holocaust and the fascist movement. He stood along side other intellectuals and created artworks that stood for his beliefs. He often collaborated art and literature as two platforms to act as one he is sometimes said to have been “creating artwork for mankind”. His artwork is loud, and vibrant and innocent. His work varied as it was very experimental at times but overall it had a long thought process and a lot of effort for execution as it was important and aiming to achieve specific qualities.

I believe Joan Miro had a larger impact on the art world because he was recognized as an artist and activist. However for myself personally I was very struck by Luicio Fontana’s Spatial concepts as they explored a whole new aspect to what space means on 2D art.
Spatial Concept, Expectations
Lucio Fontana

1959

Oil on canvas

35 3/4 × 35 3/4 in. (90.8 × 90.8 cm)