love george condo, great artist, way ahead of his time, and beautiful paint handling and passion. last night saw some good painting, walsh, nozkowski and heyl all looked good.
Wow, that's a tough painting. I love the weird teeth and the tongue/penis protruding from his mouth: the eye-target/pince-nez completes the weirdness of this picture. And the mushy paint with its weird globular strokes; and the landscape color applied to the human head and ground: it's like a red clay mountain against sky. Thanks for posting this and reminding me of this artist, Painter!
i dont like this painting. i like his work in general, his modernist looking stuff, his collages, his wierd people w/ tiny heads, etc. but i think my interest in him is limited to his more ambitious work. this looks like a goofy knockoff. this makes me realize that it's not his goofiness that interests me-- it's his attempt to paint "modernist" pictures or grand figurative ones, etc.-- not just little heads on big bodies or whatever.
i really love the way condo applies paint. they are super duper in person. he catches a lot of flack for the picasso thing, but i don't care. i like lookin' at em.
I love the way he applies paint to make face malformations. Definitely see the precursor to Dana Schutz - using painterliness, expressiveness to approximate physical deformity, sneezing, eating... the paint is the swollen lumpen flesh - and I like the nice juicy highlights on bald head, the healthy incisors, you can never have enough of those.
But I stare into his undependable eyes and want to kiss him and smack him, both at once. These characters are very engaging, in spite of their freakishness, or because of it, they befriend you, they ingratiate, but I think they are poking fun of us, they don't seem like self- portraits, they seem like someone else portraits, portraits of others that you might see walking down the street. Everyone has a mutant side, a feral side. Let's get bitten up, busted up in paint. We are all guilty and deserve to be both ridiculed and honored in a sickening portrait.
Wow that was long, but whatever, I'm on a late night bender. More art please!
Ps, zipthwung, I could be wrong about Walsh, but I thought his low hanging was about referencing furniture, the utility of objects? I don't know. I have always been suspect of this tactic, but the lowering teeters between humility and pretention. I wonder what other people think of that decision.
i think in dan walshs low hanging it was to reference human scale and also since the gallery is so large and tall, it made the paintings noticeable instead of looking stamplike on the walls, it forced the viewer to look at the work and not the gallery . i think he knows that space really well. thats why, i dont think its pretentious at all, just that he really thinks about how he wants the work to be seen to its best advantage. it takes the architecture of the gallery into the work as well. i loved the low hanging, it was different and had the feel of an installation as well as a painting show.
MM, your take on Condo is wonderful and gets to the heart of the matter. We do indeed all deserve to be honored by a sickening portrait.
I'd like to paint sickening portraits of Cheney and Rumsfeld.
Does anybody else feel like this kind of grotesque portrait (complete with vagina dentata) is usually reserved for depictions of women? I may be talking out of my ass here.
20 comments:
love george condo, great artist, way ahead of his time, and beautiful paint handling and passion. last night saw some good painting, walsh, nozkowski and heyl all looked good.
more
Painter
Could you consider posting an "open thread" post occasionally for discussing other things then the artist posted?
Wow, that's a tough painting. I love the weird teeth and the tongue/penis protruding from his mouth: the eye-target/pince-nez completes the weirdness of this picture. And the mushy paint with its weird globular strokes; and the landscape color applied to the human head and ground: it's like a red clay mountain against sky. Thanks for posting this and reminding me of this artist, Painter!
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.julieharvey.com/Gagosian2_a.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www.julieharvey.com/go-go.htm&h=325&w=202&sz=21&tbnid=x_mnDhKPAWxwFM:&tbnh=114&tbnw=70&hl=en&start=12&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dlarry%2Bgagosian%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG
hey you guys LOOK
i dont like this painting. i like his work in general, his modernist looking stuff, his collages, his wierd people w/ tiny heads, etc. but i think my interest in him is limited to his more ambitious work. this looks like a goofy knockoff. this makes me realize that it's not his goofiness that interests me-- it's his attempt to paint "modernist" pictures or grand figurative ones, etc.-- not just little heads on big bodies or whatever.
ps what was up w/ dan walsh opening? i went there at 7:05 pm and it was stone cold closed.
dan walsh opening was friday nite, not last nite
oops-- thanks.
I thought they were hung unecessarily low. And then you read the press release and I wonder if there is ANY mystery left in the world.
I meant the Dan Walsh was hung low. Why did they do that? I don't get it.
i really love the way condo applies paint. they are super duper in person. he catches a lot of flack for the picasso thing, but i don't care. i like lookin' at em.
I love the way he applies paint to make face malformations. Definitely see the precursor to Dana Schutz - using painterliness, expressiveness to approximate physical deformity, sneezing, eating... the paint is the swollen lumpen flesh - and I like the nice juicy highlights on bald head, the healthy incisors, you can never have enough of those.
But I stare into his undependable eyes and want to kiss him and smack him, both at once. These characters are very engaging, in spite of their freakishness, or because of it, they befriend you, they ingratiate, but I think they are poking fun of us, they don't seem like self- portraits, they seem like someone else portraits, portraits of others that you might see walking down the street. Everyone has a mutant side, a feral side. Let's get bitten up, busted up in paint. We are all guilty and deserve to be both ridiculed and honored in a sickening portrait.
Wow that was long, but whatever, I'm on a late night bender. More art please!
Ps, zipthwung, I could be wrong about Walsh, but I thought his low hanging was about referencing furniture, the utility of objects? I don't know. I have always been suspect of this tactic, but the lowering teeters between humility and pretention. I wonder what other people think of that decision.
i think in dan walshs low hanging it was to reference human scale and also since the gallery is so large and tall, it made the paintings noticeable instead of looking stamplike on the walls, it forced the viewer to look at the work and not the gallery . i think he knows that space really well. thats why, i dont think its pretentious at all, just that he really thinks about how he wants the work to be seen to its best advantage. it takes the architecture of the gallery into the work as well. i loved the low hanging, it was different and had the feel of an installation as well as a painting show.
I love mountain man reviews
Yes, MM is the ultimate review master - my hero(ine).
Anon, thanks for clearing up the low hang decision. It makes more sense now, I feel like I knew it and forgot.
There were a lot of dogs at the opening. Just saying.
MM, your take on Condo is wonderful and gets to the heart of the matter. We do indeed all deserve to be honored by a sickening portrait.
I'd like to paint sickening portraits of Cheney and Rumsfeld.
Does anybody else feel like this kind of grotesque portrait (complete with vagina dentata) is usually reserved for depictions of women? I may be talking out of my ass here.
LOVE!
Post a Comment