Where did Lucian go wrong?
To the best of my knowledge Lucian did not submit his painting to this forum for critique and most likely is not keenly interested in the measurements and opinions of a group of artists who have have chosen a very defined and limited range of artistic expression. He is among a number of artists who will continue to be recognized as major contributers to fine art/painting of this era. If they had a like forum and behaved like us they would be discussing the smallness of our creative world where we devote so much time to trying to figure out how to stay a few small steps above sweet photographic copies.
Egon Schiele, Picasso, Munch, Modigliani and others did works including portraits that were dismissed as "ugly" or worse and having stood the test of time have held up as noteworthy and often left us with a more revealing representation of the subject than slavish realism.
One of the great benfits of my career in illustration, design, and portrait painting is that it taught me a lot about who I am and where I fit in this world and to be open to the new, the unexpected or unanticipated and to be willing to give these things a chance show their value.
Therefore, I am at a loss to understand why so much time is given to dissing alternative expression. At several portrait seminars over the last few years the guest speakers were given to put down all that was not classic realism and drove one of my favorite authors to say that "Picasso could not draw". Which is factually not true and in any event does not make him any less a giant contributer to fine art.
I was one of the first three to vote that the portrait of the Qween had merit. I am already liking it more and I am going to find more of Freud's to see how this painting fits to the whole of his output. I may change my vote to yes.
My Grandfather suggested that it was a good idea to talk to and get to know someone you think you dislike. You might find that he is your friend.
|
Hybrid Mode
