Posted on 01/16/2009 6:27:01 AM PST by higgmeister
Yes, he did extraordinary work. I love the way he captured the effects of light and shadow. His paintings almost look like photography. Very realistic, yet, mysterious in a sense. What a talent.
Most of the modernist stuff of the past century is just total dreck. Wyeth and Hopper were some of my favorites. I can’t stand that crap that looks like a 3-year old did it, or the pretentious stuff. I was in some modern art museum down in FL a few years ago and was just shaking my head. I can’t believe they pay good money for that junk, let alone put it on display.
He will be missed by many.
Check out the Brandywine Museam in Chadds Ford, PA sometime for a nice collection of Wyeth’s work, and that of his disciples.
Been a long time since I’ve been in the Philly area, hope I can get up there some time.
Guilty. But wow almost looks like photo.
I don’t believe I’ve heard of him before. :/
RIP.
I received a book about him for Christmas, where he made comments on a number of his paintings and what he was thinking. One was entitled "The Liberal" and his comment was "This is a young lady who works for me at Chadds Ford. Interesting sort. I'm not sure what to make of her. Intelligent. Doesn't miss a trick. Blue eyes. Quick. Will snap right back at you. Her family comes from Washington and was associated, somehow, with the FBI. She's a liberal-politically-and she sat there completely within herself, just like a liberal."
LBJ awarded Mr. Wyeth a Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Some foppish art critic said Wyeth was more an illustrator than artist. That reinforced the homily that those who can’t; teach and those who can’t teach become critics if they’re connected enough. Wyeths works, in their case, truly are pearls cast before tasteless swine.
Illustration is contracted visual mediums. If the illustrator is very good at his or her craft it is art. Wyeth’s critic was being an ass on several levels by implying that
1.an artist is superior to an illustrator by the grace of higher income,
2.the work of illustrators shouldn’t be considered art,
3.superrealism detracts from a work’s worth, and
4.Andrews father, J.C., was somehow inferior because he had to produce mostly commercial works to provide for his family.
Many illustrators (by their own self-definition) were great artists while rarely acknowledging it. I submit Norman Rockwell, Toulouse-Lautrec, Charles Gibson and Aubrey Beardsley as artists who cranked out their best works under contract more often than not.
The snob factor and outright idiocy prevailing in the art world struck me so cold that I laid down the paints and clay. When I saw a common vacuum cleaner in a plexiglass box selling for $25,000 I knew the inmates were running that asylum.
I’m going to take another shot at it.
I’m rather tempted to get a photo of the False Messiah, stick it in a fishtank, and then make a major bowel dump upon it. Cart my creation, “Chocolate Love”, to the local modern art museum and demand $50k for my work.
But in all seriousness, I was watching Rick Steves’ Europe show yesterday and they had a brief blurb on Picasso and a museum in Spain. His earliest work when he was in his early teens was incredible, mostly impressionist work, he could copy the style of the greats, but over time, he devolved to that weird-$hit stuff we all know. By the time he was in his 80s, he was painting like he was 4 years old... and they considered that “progress” ! I consider that an incredible waste. It’s sad that “liberalism” has poisoned almost every field of endeavor, from politics, to culture, to just basic ethics and concepts of right and wrong. Crap is high art, magnificent art, such as Wyeth’s, is mocked. Sick and sad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.