Portrait Artist Forum - View Single Post - Blake Gopnik trashes official portraits in Washington Post article

Thomas Nash · 06-04-2005, 02:39 PM

Everybody puts on a clean shirt and brushes their teeth in the morning before they go out and face the world. No one should feel they have to apologize for wanting to look their best if they are to be painted and seen for hundreds of years.

I have always been a strong defender not only of what we do but of those that ask us to do it. Our clients appreciate portrait painting and make it possible for us to do what we love. We should be as staunch in our support of their right and motivations to commission a portrait as we are about our right to paint them.

I have found that the majority of portraits I am hired to paint are simply because someone wanted to celebrate and remember someone that they love, admire or wish to honor in some lasting way. Most portraits are initiated by someone other than the subject.

There are clients who make it clear they are concerned about how they will look, but ironically Newt Gingrich was not one of those. In all my years of portraiture I have never had a subject who was less preoccupied with his appearance. He is more into ideas. I could've painted a montage of the Contract with America he is holding and some other symbols of things he is interested in and left him out of the painting altogether and I don't think he would've cared.

I have written a response to the WP but I have no confidence they would print it. The article was nearly 3000 words long but you are only allowed a maximum of 700 words to respond.

06-04-2005, 02:39 PM	#9
Thomas Nash SOG Member Joined: Apr 2004 Location: Roswell, GA Posts: 46	Everybody puts on a clean shirt and brushes their teeth in the morning before they go out and face the world. No one should feel they have to apologize for wanting to look their best if they are to be painted and seen for hundreds of years. I have always been a strong defender not only of what we do but of those that ask us to do it. Our clients appreciate portrait painting and make it possible for us to do what we love. We should be as staunch in our support of their right and motivations to commission a portrait as we are about our right to paint them. I have found that the majority of portraits I am hired to paint are simply because someone wanted to celebrate and remember someone that they love, admire or wish to honor in some lasting way. Most portraits are initiated by someone other than the subject. There are clients who make it clear they are concerned about how they will look, but ironically Newt Gingrich was not one of those. In all my years of portraiture I have never had a subject who was less preoccupied with his appearance. He is more into ideas. I could've painted a montage of the Contract with America he is holding and some other symbols of things he is interested in and left him out of the painting altogether and I don't think he would've cared. I have written a response to the WP but I have no confidence they would print it. The article was nearly 3000 words long but you are only allowed a maximum of 700 words to respond.