Thursday, 20 October 2022

4 Favourite contemporary painters

 

During the second year of my degree course I started to paint very 'loose' pictures. Most were based on conflict or tragedy, and contained very little recognisable composition, or signs of skill.

I suppose they were partly influenced by Hockney's and Kitai's early RCA paintings, but not in a sense of imagery. It was the fluidity and unhindered approach to image that appealed; those who know DH's Typhoo Tea paintings will understand what I mean. After years of restriction being stuck in front of life figures, the freedom that they offered was intoxicating.  


One major exponent of this attitude towards work is Peter Saul (above). When I first saw his work I was completely enthralled. We're talking of late 60's or early 70's, before the internet had been invented, and before instant reference to artist's work was possible. One saw bits and pieces of his work only rarely. 


Joyce Pensato (above) is another painter who follows the same ideals. She paints what she wants, how she wants, and probably when she wants. The joyful liberty in her work is very refreshing.


Then we come to the wonderful Rose Wylie (above). Wylie takes the concept to even higher levels, and her often very large childish images slap you in the face with their outrageous spontaneity, and apparent lack of skill or study. I would love to own some.


Lastly we come to Cply (William N Copley) who's often disturbing work is difficult to ignore. 

There will always be those who say 'My 4 year old child could have done that', and now that they've been shown how to, maybe they could. But it always takes someone to lead the way.

I don't expect many to like these works, but personally I find them as important as Impressionism or Expressionism. And they all make me feel HAPPY.   



29 comments:

  1. Not my cup of tea, but good that they make you feel happy!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I suspect that the majority will feel as you do. The paintings that painters like are usually very different to the likes of others.

      Delete
  2. Thank you for this lesson in contemporary art Cro. I would like to think that I am open-minded about modern painting. Of the three, I find Copley's image the most entrancing - that cramped fluidity. There appear to be two brown bottles or are they hand grenades? What do you make of them?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I should have said, "Of the four". Sorry.

      Delete
    2. I imagined they were Whisky bottles. Thrown by an angry audience maybe?

      Delete
  3. Don't do much for me either. Maybe you have to be an artist to understand them

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, Local Alien, take heart. You don't "have be an artist to understand them". Even artists, by which I mean those who actually make a living out of their art, cut off their ear in the process or kill themselves as a last resort, don't subscribe to Cro's notion that some art will only ever be understood by other artists. The arrogance of that statement is breathtaking. Anyway, in the quest of insight, we may also ask "what is art", "what and WHO defines art".

      In the end, the only question is, art or not: "What does speak to us?" And if the above speaks to Cro, ok.

      U

      Delete
    2. As usual I suspect that you are replying to something you've seen elsewhere. Nowhere did I say that only artists 'understand' other artists. What I will say, however, is that artists have a different way of looking at work by other artists. Musicians are much the same, as I expect are brain surgeons, and fish mongers. Do read more carefully!

      Delete
    3. Cro, in your reply to GZ's comment you said: "The paintings that painters like are usually very different to the likes of others." A sentiment you have shared previously.

      U

      Delete
    4. And I stick by it. If you ever experience a bunch of painters talking about each others work, they certainly won't sound like Brian Sewell.

      Delete
  4. Art should make the viewer feel something, anything, joy is always best

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My favourite works always make me smile.

      Delete
    2. Art should make you THINK.

      U

      Delete
    3. Why [art should make you think]? To name one of many: Guernica (Picasso).

      U

      Delete
    4. Naming a Picasso piece doesn't tell me WHY art should make me think. In my opinion, art is for looking at and enjoying, or not as the piece appeals or not. Understanding what the artist was trying to say has nothing to do with it, unless he or she is still around to explain it.

      Delete
    5. River, I wasn't naming any old "Picasso piece". It was a defining work if you knew the historical background and take into account morals and ethics.

      Still, I do take your point that I didn't cover the "why" in its entirety. I'll try and keep my answer as short as possible before Cro's comment box implodes. And I won't ask again what actually does constitute "art".

      To think of the visual arts as something pleasing to the eye is, well, sweet, innocent and lazy. After all who wants to engage brain when a quick cursory glance will suffice whether we "like" something or not?

      Any creation, be it paint, be it print, indeed music, has a message. There is a message sent out (by the creator) - for the onlooker/reader/listener often not known; and then there is the recipient (onlooker/reader/listener) who is creative in their own way by what they see/read/hear.

      So, to stick with Cro's original four, I can't say I find them visually appealing. I'd say two of them are appalling. I'd say they are all pretty depressing. I'd say they are an odd choice (which reflects on Cro - though what do I know about him?). However, I have looked at them several times. LOOKED at them. Immersed myself. Tried to make sense of them. Not least the eternal question what went on in the painters' minds. But that's pure speculation. So best stick with your [or, rather, my mind]. What is it you/I see?

      What I see is a car crash, a disturbed mind, some arbitrary mermaids, and a ball game. Great. Whilst I think they (apart from the car crash) are all crap, not least technically, at least, and to give them their due, they made me think. Not least about Cro. Why did I take the time? Out of respect for Cro.

      Let's leave it there.

      God, sigh, so much more to say on the subject, so little space to do it in.

      U

      Delete
  5. Abstract Expressionism is a freedom that takes courage to reveal the imagination we all know, but few put on canvas or paper. Like them or not, folks, I believe, think more when looking at abstract art because it gives them exposure to their unused brain territory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's usually that old maxim of 'I don't know much about art, but I know what I like', and I think that's fine. I often despair at work I see on people's walls, but if they like it; that's all that matters.

      Delete
  6. The artist must be happiest producing pieces that please him/her. There is a big line between the artist and the buyer. No artist wants to just produce art for sale. I understand this as my friend sells art as a hobby and teaches art to be able to continue her hobby. .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know several painters who work to sell, full stop. Their work is aimed at a market, and as such is not very personal. However, there's room for everyone.

      Delete
  7. I see what you mean Cro. I may look at a painting and have an immediate reaction that I like it without knowing why. Then my sister-in-law’s sister who is an artist will point out that, for example, shades of red and green across the color wheel have been juxtaposed and that may be one of the aspects that my eyes unknowingly appreciate. Much the same as when I listen to jazz as a musician and hear someone improvise within the chord changes…I appreciate it differently as a musician because I understand why it works so well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The comparison with musicians is a good one. Things that a musician would pick-up from another's' composition would be meaningless to someone like me.

      Delete
  8. May we have an ''art show'' of some of your works please?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Probably not. I have shown my work previously, and I think that's enough.

      Delete
  9. I cannot claim to be an artist. But it seems to me that art provokes. Either thought or emotion. Sometimes it's just a visceral thing. But there a connection. The things that grace our walls say a great deal about us.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Some of these have happy colours, but overall, I don't like them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I knew no-one would like any of them. I must have strange taste.

      Delete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...