Struggling with the Great Masters

If you're even a casual art enthusiast you've probably been exposed to thousands and thousands masterpieces. History of art classes routinely focus on the most seminal and well-realized works. Art history books feature only the best of the best. Museums prominently display their most prized works and use their web sites to tout the same. While studying the masterworks certainly has value, the focus on great paintings can lead to the mistaken impression that all the old masters ever did was sit around churning out one masterpiece after another.

As a painter, this artistic hit parade can be a fairly disheartening. I'm certainly not churning out one masterpiece after another. (...for that matter, I'm not sure I've even churned out one masterpiece). That's why I get a special thrill whenever I come face to face with a less than successful work by one of the old masters.

The Art Institute of Chicago owns a couple paintings that perfectly capture the not always successful masters in action. Both happen to be seascapes done is successive years. One is by Manet, the other by Whistler. I love both painters dearly, but neither has quite hit the mark with these works.

I've affectionately dubbed this pair "Boats We Couldn't Be Bothered to Paint"; and while each has its own sketchy charms, neither is particularly convincing.

Steamboat Leaving Boulogne, 1864 by Edouard Manet
Image courtesy of the Art Institute of Chicago

Trouville (Grey and Green, The Silver Sea), 1865 by James McNeil Whistler
Image Courtesy of the Art Institute of Chicago

It's not that these are necessarily "bad" paintings. They're not. And it's not that I take some perverse pleasure in bearing witness to their shortcomings. I don't. Rather, I appreciate their role as a corrective to the idea that great paintings are easy. They're not. Painting is fluid, messy, and imprecise. Success is never guaranteed, and making a really great painting is never automatic - even if your an old master.

Comments

The Ohio Historical Center: A Defense

A couple weeks ago I was contacted by Carrie Ghose at Business First to share my thoughts on architecture in central Ohio. The recent controversy surrounding the new Student Union at Ohio State had apparently sparked a number of conversations regarding what constitutes "good" building design. Carrie was following that story , and developing a second piece to get feedback on other notable Columbus buildings. At the time I offered a staunch a defense of what I believe might be the most maligned and misunderstood building in central Ohio, the Ohio Historical Center. Business First wasn't able to run the whole piece, so I've decided to turn it into a blog post. photo courtesy of OHS/ www.ohiomemory.org The refrain is a as old as the building itself, "It's ugly. It's just a giant brown box. It doesn't even look like a museum". Sadly, it's that exact line of thinking that poses the greatest threat to the building Architectural Record referre...

Hashtag WIP

After spending much of the last six months negotiating work, planning for work, talking about work, scheduling work, rescheduling work, and waiting for weather that might accommodate work, I'm happy to report that work has commenced. The Akron almost mansion has recently enjoyed the fruits of many a laborer, and the results are becoming almost photogenic. So, in no particular order, here is an update of what's happened since my last post. A wooden door with a crystal doorknob is pictured against a light blue wall. We have removed more wallpaper. This picture is from an upstairs bedroom and is notable as that means all the wallpaper on the first floor has been removed. I like the color and composition here, and offer this as a good example of how most of the interior rooms were handled. Trim throughout the house is painted that creamy white, and all interior doors have maintained their original finish. Remember pals, these houses are only original once. A pink bathroom sink hang...

Either that wallpaper goes, or I do...

I mentioned in my previous post that our Akron almost-mansion was built in 1925 by Akron entrepreneur and wallpaper baron W.D. Turner. And while we appreciate that Mr. Turner was willing to put his money where his house is, the wallpaper selections he made those 100-odd years ago will likely not be accompanying the home into its next century. A hole cut in the wall shows off our brand new PEX plumbing supply lines as well as 2.25 square feet of wallpaper that won't have to be removed. Win. Win. So, we continue to remove wallpaper. It's slow going, messy, and not particularly glamorous. Favoring the "kitchen sink" approach, we're tossing everything at the removal process. That includes steam, scoring, fabric softener, more steam, sharp objects, still more steam, and good old elbow grease. With a bit of perseverance, we've got two rooms done and maybe three to go. I know I said this work wasn't glamorous, but I do like how the window, the diagonal light, ...

On Summit

Search This Blog