if it's good and not an exact copy of a previous artist than it is a discovery--that it, it is cutting edge.
also re:Currin.
Just because an artist manages to make a certain kind of art fashionable for people to buy doesn't mean that s/he actually influenced the artists in that genre who make that kind of work thereafter--they just influenced the market.
I agree with those comments about John Currin. The fact that we are writing on a blog called "PainterNYC" is in some way due to Currin and his contemporaries. I think young painters today don't quite understand that. The way we can talk about 'loving' painting was a totally absurd thought before that generation came along. It wasn't just about the market.
i can't believe you are such a sheep that you couldn't love an unpopular thing until john currin made it popular for rich people to buy that thing. that's pathetic.
Don't y'all think it's kind of difficult to talk about this work, especially if you haven't seen it in person? The color reproduction on the web is for shit, plus you can't see what's really happening in the image. The images for the Mary Boone show from his last show looked just about nothing like the paintings in person, and also, the scale of the pieces is really nice to boot, which isn't at all reflected in a small-for-web image. The material use is really great and THAT certainly doesn't come across in this image. The use of matte and gloss mediums, touches of airbrush, paint that's been dragged with a knife, freehand bits, masked bits, and areas where he's playing within a close range of values. i like the fact that over the past few years he's been really playing and extending his repetoire within a tight range. he's found a lot of imaginative ways to make images within the contstraints he's set for himself.
I agree w/ Anon and JD--Currin changed all, Yuskavage, too, and to a lesser degree Catherine Howe. Yuskavage's Tit Heaven watercolors, unforgettable! with the bad girls 1992 show at Elizabeth Koury...then Currin's palette knife girls show...that SHOCKED me. It really did. More than Oehlen, who I love for his abandon. They (Currin, Yuskavage, Howe) opened up new mining of territory within figuration. It was huge and exciting. Of course many people were building on these themes in their studios, Ellen Phelan was making the doll paintings, Alex Katz was certainly working, Odd Nerdrum was showing, but Currin and Yuskavage were the first to bring out the conflict between history and present time on the surface of painting.
209 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 209 of 209if it's good and not an exact copy of a previous artist than it is a discovery--that it, it is cutting edge.
also re:Currin.
Just because an artist manages to make a certain kind of art fashionable for people to buy doesn't mean that s/he actually influenced the artists in that genre who make that kind of work thereafter--they just influenced the market.
true anon 7:13
a white male figurative painter rocks the art world and is remembered forever?
haven't we heard this story before?
Anon 5:55, WELL SAID!!!
I agree with those comments about John Currin. The fact that we are writing on a blog called "PainterNYC" is in some way due to Currin and his contemporaries. I think young painters today don't quite understand that. The way we can talk about 'loving' painting was a totally absurd thought before that generation came along. It wasn't just about the market.
i can't believe you are such a sheep that you couldn't love an unpopular thing until john currin made it popular for rich people to buy that thing. that's pathetic.
Don't y'all think it's kind of difficult to talk about this work, especially if you haven't seen it in person? The color reproduction on the web is for shit, plus you can't see what's really happening in the image. The images for the Mary Boone show from his last show looked just about nothing like the paintings in person, and also, the scale of the pieces is really nice to boot, which isn't at all reflected in a small-for-web image. The material use is really great and THAT certainly doesn't come across in this image. The use of matte and gloss mediums, touches of airbrush, paint that's been dragged with a knife, freehand bits, masked bits, and areas where he's playing within a close range of values. i like the fact that over the past few years he's been really playing and extending his repetoire within a tight range. he's found a lot of imaginative ways to make images within the contstraints he's set for himself.
yeah, whatever Jay...
i saw the show--it was no fun
I agree w/ Anon and JD--Currin changed all, Yuskavage, too, and to a lesser degree Catherine Howe. Yuskavage's Tit Heaven watercolors, unforgettable! with the bad girls 1992 show at Elizabeth Koury...then Currin's palette knife girls show...that SHOCKED me. It really did. More than Oehlen, who I love for his abandon.
They (Currin, Yuskavage, Howe) opened up new mining of territory within figuration. It was huge and exciting. Of course many people were building on these themes in their studios, Ellen Phelan was making the doll paintings, Alex Katz was certainly working, Odd Nerdrum was showing, but Currin and Yuskavage were the first to bring out the conflict between history and present time on the surface of painting.
Post a Comment