Blog

Prez and Lady Pix

2/19/2018 11:45:09 PM by Jacqueline Knell
9 Comments


Prez and Lady Pix.  The art world, and possibly America, is weighing in on the recently unveiled portraits of Barak Obama and Michelle at the National Portrait Gallery.  I cannot let this go by without acknowledgment and a comment or two.  However, most critiques have been more thought provoking than anything I would say.  ArtistsNetwork,  NPR and the Los Angeles Times helped me understand that these portraits are going into the National Portrait Gallery of the Smithsonian, not the White House.  The LA Times article interprets the symbolism and social context of the paintings.   ArtistsNetwork shows another portrait by each of the artists, locking these new official portraits into established artistic styles. The New Yorker extends this discussion and analyzes how Barak’s portrait portrays his particular leadership and presidency. According to her painter, Michelle’s portrait goes beyond portraying a particular Black celebrity. It depicts a successful person.

 

  

 

Two artist friends expressed their views of the portraits. I found their comments on Facebook and, with their permission, I added them to the conversation.  Their thoughts help us to look at the portraits with an artist’s eye and a citizen’s heart.

 

Martha Cowan

Well I would dare comment on this. So there is a definite uniqueness or creative idea behind these two portraits, esp. Barack's. But I'm more interested in the negative shapes than the actual figures. Obama floating in a hedge and seemingly unaware is weird, but memorable. And it is definitely casual and different. Michelle's is washed out and boring, and looks nothing like her, but the composition is fine. But neither portrait, esp Barack's, is Presidential. 

 

Aside from all that, the painting skills and knowledge of the human form from both painters is amateur at best. What about the 6th finger on Barack's left hand?! And for Michelle, at least get a good likeness! Show the viewer some skills in everything a true painter knows. Why didn't they choose an artist from the Portrait Society of America? But here we all are talking about the paintings, which makes them memorable and is likely what the Obamas wanted.  In time, these paintings will seem even more ridiculous.

 

Gayle Stratford

OMGoodnes! Couldn't they give her a nicely lighted face without a sneer? And shouldn't the face be the focal point? My eye goes right to the clumsy white shapes under her hand. And that's not all...

 

Way too much going on in that face in my opinion. I can hear my teacher/mentor yelling from his grave, "Less is more! Simplify! Are those forms or are they cuts, dents and bruises?"

 

The shape under her hand - I know there is a finger back there but the way it's modeled (over-modeled) it looks like there is a mouth at the base of her neck.

 

As a traditional figurative/portrait painter I clearly understand the struggle with hands and faces - especially mouths and expressions. But there are artists who can do whatever style the client wants but who also understand the forms/structure of the face and hands. And can get a terrific likeness. After all, it IS supposed to be a portrait, not just a figurative piece.

 

It takes a huge amount of study/practice/dedication and to me it appears these artists have not done their homework. (In my humble opinion ) It's a shame because, whatever you think of the Obamas, they made it to the White House and deserve well-executed, beautiful portraits.

 

A lot of opinions! But I think the Obamas were pleased. If I were commissioned to paint the former President’s portrait, he would not be pleased. I would most likely paint a  shadow on his face, because I like dramatic lighting. But I strongly doubt that Mr. Obama would want that. It doesn’t take a Jungian to know that one could mistakenly interpret an area of shady, cool colors as the dark side of his personality and, perhaps, his legacy.  However, I am confident that I could correctly calculate his manual digits, although they might appear arthritic.  Those hands might not portray an image of fitness and could be construed as his being an unfit President.  And those ears…I would love to paint those ears.  Perhaps, he would concede on this issue and regard this strong feature as listening to the people. Such a tough job to paint the Prez and Lady. So glad they didn't ask me.

 

 




Comments

9 Responses to Prez and Lady Pix

As for looking -Presidential” . . . What does that actually mean today? I like the break from the traditional portraits that have been done in the past. From an art standpoint, they both indicate movement in portrait styes. However, Michelle is not recognizable and she is not grey, she is brown. The style is fine, but it i meant to portray a public leader.

I thought these were supposed to be portraits of people. The first things you notice about each are the NOT-people parts. In both cases, the backgrounds and composition overpower the subjects.

A side from the subject matter, I thought that the artistic
techniques and painterly skills were amateurish at best!?
Michelle's proportion on her arms were off, and I don't understand
Barak's 6th finger?
I know some fantastic (professional) black painters...
These weren't it!!.....in my opinion!!

I am looking forward to seeing these portraits in person when I am in Washington DC next month. I will let you know my impressions after that visit.

I guess that I am just a traditional kinda girl! My favorite portraits are usually impressionistic,
but, I feel that Presidential Portraits should conform to a more conventional style. Were these to be family portraits, then I would applaud their creativity and imaginative interpretation..
I agree with others that Michelle's likeness was not captured, and I spent more time enjoying the geometric design of her dress, than her essence. Just my two cents worth...

"beauty is in the eye of the beholder" ... and these paintings are lovely to behold. Barack's face reflects determination; he is seated in a very traditional chair; and he is "surrounded" - pretty indicative of his experience in office. During her tenure as First Lady, Michelle always favored contemporary and local fashion designers; she is a lanky and "fit" person, especially in the arms area which she often showcased in her wardrobe -- the particular artist she selected paints in "gray" tones so those tones are to be expected in this painting. I feel these paintings accurately reflect the people, the times, and the artists -- maybe not structurally perfect, but who really is so perfect? Art is not about perfection, it is about conveying a message and these paintings definitely do that!

Barak's pose is unfortunate, it reminds me of the pose I take when I'm in my 'porcelain library'. At least if the TP runs out there are plenty of leafs within arms reach.

Michelle's reminds me of a nice 'illustration' from the 70's.

Well first. I see this with a slightly different eye after 50 years as a Landscape Architect. Starting with POTUS No,1 I see a horizontal bed of ground-cover/vines under the chair proceeding to just past the farthest leg than a vertical wall/fence covered with the same ground-cover/vine climbing the wall behind him and the 6th finger,to me, seems to be the fleshy skin between the wrist and knuckle of the pinky finger. I very much like the coloring etc On to WPOTUS. Every woman is not able to carry out that bold a statement (or wants to) I love the dress (I also spent 9 years in the SHMATAH business) I am picturing a 10 year old (in 50 years) saying " Mommy why is she gray, even her lips, is she supposed to be dead?" She is a beautiful women but it doesn't show. Her nails seem to long for someone who spends a lot of time gardening 'nuff said

Correction.......I take back my comment on his finger. It does seem more like a sixth finger.