Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by gator_fever, Feb 12, 2018.
I sure as hell hope so. That is a redonculous portrait of Barry against the other portraits.
The Beatles ripped off girl groups and American 50s rock, but somehow they are considered maybe the best band ever. Nobody creates in a vacuum. Whatever you think of Wiley's work, he's not simply copying someone, just like the Beatles didn't just copy Buddy Holly note for note.
For any who may still be confused, the National Portrait Gallery has a rotating collection of different portraits of the presidents done in different styles and mediums, but each president has a designated "Official Portrait," and this is them:
Seems like Wiley bites off famous portraits for just about all of his work......guys a hack. But since he's a gay black man, he's going to not only get a pass but be celebrated for his lack of originality and overall talent.
No, he's pretty much just copying famous subject matter and adding some ridiculous shock value element to it.
I see much better work from my good friends high school aged daughter and her art school friends.
Really with this guy? Recurring theme of the tapestry like backgrounds, non-original subject matter, to go along with overall average work in the construction of the composition
President Trump's portrait is on display at Mar a Lago but could probably be relocated to the National Portrait Gallery, provided that a suitable fee is paid for the loan.
Have you seen baroque and rococo style art? Its all pretty garish and over the top. Anyways, this seems to be a common critique of art. If your HS friends daughter and her pals can do it better, why aren't they? Besides, no one was really doing what Wiley was doing. Young black men haven't been typically the subject of classical style portraiture. And for people who think the Western canon is under assault is seems weird to go after a guy who basically embraces it. Anyways, if you don't like it, no big deal. Not everyone likes hip hop/rap either, and this guy is definitely doing "hip hop" art.
They are......like I said, they're kids in a specialized art high school.
It's not the garish, over the top aspects. That's not my issue
-continued use of unoriginal subject matter
-average construction of the compositions
I'm not against hip hop music or art. Actually a big fan of both. That's not my issue. My point is that this Wiley guy is a hack. And not worthy as an artist to be honored for a presidential portrait commission.
Yeah, about the same size as Trump's based on them shaking hands.
But Obama isn't fixated on his hand size. Has enough self confidence to move past that.
Geez Louise!!! His portrait is going to stick out like a turd in a punch bowl. Much like his presidency. I hope he reconsiders.
Well, that isn't your choice to make. Win the Presidency, and it will be your choice.
Personally, I don't think the pic. is all that bad--just the *LOUD AS HELL BACKDROP* that's the problem.
Looks utterly ridonkulous.
Interesting how this garnered 2 'disagrees'....but no substantive rebuttal--while the 'evidence' is rather compelling that the leaves were not individually painted.
I guess an official presidential portrait isn't important enough of a project to warrant individual attention to the leaves.
Shame. I think many artists would find the project important enough to warrant individual attention even to the leaves (if you must go with leaves...).
Since it's photoshopped (or whatever), seems like it's negotiable--hopefully they'll 'negotiate' the stupid leafy backdrop.
For people who lament against the "elitist" left, you guys seem to have a shockingly low opinion of basically all other people's abilities.
You know more about law than legal scholars, you know about the economy than economists, you know more about education than pedagogy researchers, you know more about parenting than developmental psychologists, you know more about climate science than climate scientists, and now you know more about art criticism than art critics.
Like I said, no big deal if you don't like it. But if he had done a portrait by a portrait artist in the same general style of 43 others, wouldn't the same above critique be valid?
The painting is oil on canvas. Not sure how you "Photoshop" that.