[mairdie]

An excellent article from an art historian's point of view. Makes me want to do a video on portraiture (not including theirs!).

Right click View Image for larger images:

Music Video of Toulouse-Lautrec Paintings (roughly chronological)

Music Video of Van Gogh Paintings (roughly chronological)

[mairdie]

PING

[txrefugee]

Barack comes off as superficial, the plants having more personality than he has. Michele’s is more interesting. She looks like a man in a dress.

[Da Coyote]

For me, the really sad part of this is that there are many black artists who have real talent and who now have to live in the light of that set of mediocre (at best) paintings. Paintings that reflect the mediocrity of Dorkbama the Muslim eunuch quota boy, but can be interpreted by some to reflect on the entire race.

[captain_dave]

Obama potraits are paint-by-numbers masterpieces. They’re like the look alike YSL logo bags with stylized XZF logos. Pretentious Obvious Fakes

[relictele]

The Obama portraits are kind of shocking - not only because the paintings are so cliched and amateurish, but because Barack and Michelle would choose artists primarily by virtue of their skin color and radical views

Kind of shocking? Has the author been hiding in a cave for the last 10 years?

The Obamas have had one aim from the start: angrily sticking a thumb in the eye of America and its culture, such as it is.

[COUNTrecount]

[mairdie]

FTA:

My art school was literally connected to a world-class museum, and many of my classes were actually taught in the picture galleries, where we could discuss artistic theory in front of famous masterpieces. Masterpieces have a tendency to shut you up, especially when you think you know a thing or two. You can’t do much more than just inhale the genius around an old master painting. You’re confronted with the reality that what you’re looking at is far beyond your talents and abilities. The best thing you can do is keep your mouth shut and try to learn something.

[Fresh Wind]

Well, if a drop cloth covered with paint dribbles and splatters is considered art, then the Obama portraits certainly are as well.

[FrankR]

[MayflowerMadam]

“Right click View Image for larger images”

I think I’ll pass; these small images already are way too big.

[Nifster]

I think the portraits accurately reflect two of the biggest empty suits that managed to come close to destroying America

[robel]

Art is a reflection of reality. So, yeah, they’re pretty accurate. Painful to look at, but accurate.

[BenLurkin]

[BlackAdderess]

I think what we have here is the presidential equivalent of embarrassing photos of parents from the 1970’s.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

“...but because Barack and Michelle would choose artists primarily by virtue of their skin color and radical views instead of whether they could actually pull off an official portrait.”

And just who, exactly, is surprised by this? It’s how they’ve made EVERY decision that I can see.

Also, those portraits are absolutely ridiculous. A final FU to We The People!

[KarlInOhio]

Was the artist conveying Obama in poison ivy? Obama in kudzu (an foreign entity that makes like a living hell through its invasive growth and a japanese plant).

[butlerweave]

If Obama’s portrait was made in China expect a flood of copies on eBay for $2.00 ,LOL

[spokeshave]

Art....?
Art of the insult.

[NorthMountain]

Several words come to mind. "Art" is not one of them.

"Dreck", for example. Or "Schlock". Garbage. Rubbish. Pictorial drivel. Incompetence. Mediocrity. Stupidity. Filth. They might earn a "C" in a high-school art class.

[rockrr]

I chuckle every time I see them. “The Emperor’s New Clothes” was never so apt - and best of all they did it to themselves!