Blake Gopnik trashes official portraits in Washington Post article

Thomas Nash · 06-09-2005, 07:39 PM

It's true this type of thing is partly done for fun. In some ways I'm guilty of doing what Tom Wolfe rightly mocked thirty years ago in "The Painted Word", art that requires an explanation in order to make any sense of it.

If it was the only redeeming quality of the painting that would be one thing. I figure as long as it doesn't compromise the more important aspects of the work; if you can pull it off in a natural way it's "all good".

I mentioned this pattern to the audience at the unveiling in the Capitol five years ago. Since then I've pretty much kept it to myself.

Obviously I looked at this element of the painting as a "bonus". I think it is a healthy habit artistically to try to think innovatively on every level.

One reason I bring it up now is that I found it ironic that the W.P. critic selected my painting to illustrate his distaste for official painted portraits. He feels there is no more room for innovation in traditional oil painting. I think he is wrong and also he chose a bad example to pick on if I do say so myself. Of course since he never bothered to call me, he didn't know what he didn't know.

It was so nice of the clouds and everything to align themselves so I could just "slavishly copy them". NOT.

Claudemir Bonfim · 06-09-2005, 08:19 PM

I already declared that I'm a fan of your work and I reaffirm it now.
I would like to see more of your procedure in portraying here.
Hope it will possible someday.

Tom Edgerton · 06-10-2005, 08:59 AM

A client in DC sent me the article about a week ago.

What is glaringly evident from the beginning is that no curators or critical supporters of traditional art forms were interviewed in an attempt to balance the point of view. The thrust of the article is that "everyone I talked to said this kind of art is dead." And it's a LONG article to make no more point than that.

Anyone taking a true art historian's view of the last 35 years or so can't possibly miss the resurgence of realist art in all media. And what fuels this resurgence is that the public at large for the most part prefers it.

Again, read "The Painted Word." The point that Tom Wolfe makes is that abstract art in the mid-20th Century was the invention of a handful of critics and painters in NYC, and that the whole movement was basically propped up in the critical press in spite of huge indifference on the part of the public. Duh. Today, it's the same dynamic, only the styles and content have changed.

For another really interesting and insightful piece by Wolfe on the traditional/contemporary art battle, find his article on sculptor Frederick Hart in the New York Times Sunday Magazine from a few years back.

The problem with critique is that you are making your living commenting on and interpreting the work of others that you can't do yourself. As a result, you don't have a true understanding of the process and technique, yet you have to appear to be an "expert." So a common thread in a lot of critique is a "build up/tear down" model. You claim that you were the first to "discover" an artist/musician/actor or whatever, and then subsequently you claim you're the first to know when they're "washed up." The artist can't survive on such a rollercoaster, yet many manage to anyway, because the best art survives and endures on its own merit.

Nothing will be any different here. Hang in there, everyone. This article is already lining birdcages. Our paintings will be here a hundred years from now (or more) if we make them as good as we possibly can. And Tom Nash knows this, thank God.

Best--TE

Michele Rushworth · 06-10-2005, 09:22 AM

Quote:

...what fuels this (realist) resurgence is that the public at large for the most part prefers it.

Amen!

Michele Rushworth · 06-10-2005, 09:40 AM

Quote:

...abstract art in the mid-20th Century was the invention of a handful of critics and painters in NYC.

It's truly amazing how many lives (directly and indirectly, so many years later) that Clement Greenberg was able to impact.

Thomas Nash · 06-10-2005, 10:48 AM

"This article is already lining birdcages. "

Almost makes me wish I owned a bird. I do have a neighbor who is trying to train a new puppy though! There is a use for everything,

Thomas Nash · 06-18-2005, 10:05 AM

I finally put some photos taken during my sessions with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, on my web site. Many of them are the ones already posted here but some are different.

Because of the W.P. article I chose this portrait to feature as the first in a new section I call "Making the Portrait". The link is:
http://www.thomasnash.com/making.html or just go to www.thomasnash.com. Cynthia also has me linked here.

I am just starting to develop the site, it will change greatly in the next few weeks.

Mikael Melbye · 06-18-2005, 12:50 PM

I've read the whole story with great interest, and intensifying disgust of critics. I have been an international opera singer for more then twenty five years, and have naturally had to endure the ups and downs of these persons that usually have no clue about whatever they are criticizing. The key word here being "criticizing", not "reviewing" as it should be. In music I found that that a constructive critique was so seldom that I sometimes had the urge to clip it out and post it somewhere.
Anyway, it seems absolutely clear to me, that this man has no idea whatsoever of what he is talking, and I wish that the demonstration of professionalism and method that you put on display for us here in the forum, would be something that he could see and hopefully blush in shame over.

We have a saying in the music world that goes: don't worry about it, tomorrow they will wrap fish in it!

Or as my fellow Dane Hans Christian Andersen once said when given one of many harsh critiques: "One would only wish that it was written on softer paper more suitable for the destination of it!"

All the best and God bless

Mikael

Michele Rushworth · 06-18-2005, 12:57 PM

Thanks for posting this, Tom.

Looking at your paintings again, I'm particularly struck by how well done the hands are!

Thomas Nash · 06-18-2005, 05:42 PM

Thanks Mikael,

I've been admiring your work. It's seems that the artists, dancers, and actors you have painted made interesting subjects and you have done a great job of painting them. I particularly like the one of artist Tage Anderson and the colorful portrait of actress Ghita Norby.

Thank you too Michele, I do try to put almost as much care into the posing and painting of the hands as I do the head. They may not always be an important focal point, but if they're bad, they can spoil the rest of the painting.