Previous Posts: June 2012

'What fascinates Damien so much is the blind credence we human beings have...'

[It's] the art equivalent of your dad dancing to Coldplay.

With reference to the promotional filmettes of the Rembrandt and the Hirst, you are letting your views on the artists influence your views on the films themselves. Whatever you think of the works of art behind talked about, the piece about the Hirst is actually very sober in the words it uses, while the Rembrandt video uses the words genius, iconic, virtuosity, seminal and astonishing all within the space of a few seconds. Just what we art historians were taught not to do. Knowledgable? He's reading from a script. Understated? It's all sales talk, with a bit of art history-lite thrown in. And you took that quote about blind credence totally out of context.

I am not trying to defend Damien Hirst, only to keep you on your toes!

I think very selective quotes are usually a bad idea, speaking as a former lawyer, so was a bit surprised to see the Hirst one. 

If the portrait is confirmed as being Austen, it may be an embarrassment to the National Portrait Gallery, which granted the picture a licence for sale abroad on the basis that it could not be the writer.

The gallery chose not to comment.

The [Rice Portrait] website claims that the portrait is signed several times in monogram, inscribed JANE and dated 1788 but, from my lengthy experience of examining British portraits, these apppear to be purely incidental and meaningless markings. They were not noted by Thomas Harding Newman, owner of the portrait in 1880, who attributed it to Zoffany. They do not appear in photographs taken by Emery Walker in about 1910, despite claims to the contrary on the website. They were not apparent to the professional painting conservator who examined the portrait with others at Henry Rice's request before cleaning it in 1985. They were not apparent to Christie's experienced cataloguing staff in 2007 when the portrait was put up for sale in New York, despite an earlier report of initials on the portrait.

This happens when people stop learning art history.

The circular stain is an iron-gall ink stain, probably from the base of an ink-pot, so (while we can never know for sure) there is certainly a chance that the stain could be from the artist’s studio.

The Invisible Line uses photography, video and poetry to document how Jong remembers falling in love over a four-year period leading up to her wedding day. The work is intimate and echoes the bold and provocative sentiment of Nan Goldin and Tracey Emin, but with the snapshot aesthetic of William Eggelston. Highly adept at interjecting private moments into a public space, Jong’s work provides a window into realized and uninhibited displays of passion.Where most people fail at being able to completely let go, Jong travels deep into the nether lands of love where her heart acts as a compass.

The photographs on view mimic pieces to a larger puzzle, offering micro-details of when and how Jong’s general existence and personal transition began to crystallize. Between the creation of each image and its pixel and grain, is a gesture of emotion that captures a dissolve and discovery of self, simultaneously. The images are uninhibited and demonstrate a form of passion seldom experienced in contemporary art, but universal to all.

Having just read about your transvestite triumph at the NPG, I wondered whether your readers might be interested to hear that the gallery is still acquiring pictures of reassuringly tweedy English gentlemen, in this case the only known double portrait (non photographic) of Eric Ravilious (standing) and Edward Bawden (seated) by Michael Rothenstein, dating from 1933.

Interference strategies for art 

Friday 22 – Saturday 23 June 2012

Hosted by the VCA, this Transdisciplinary Imaging Conference takes place over two stimulating days when acclaimed professionals including curators, historians, creative arts practitioners, critics and theorists will explore transdisciplinary imaging. 

Art, Science and Culture The notion of ‘Interference’ is posed here as an antagonism between production and seduction, as a redirection of affect, or as an untapped potential for repositioning artistic critique. Maybe art doesn’t have to work as a wave that displaces or reinforces the standardized protocols of data/messages, but can instead function as a kind of signal that disrupts and challenges perceptions. ‘Interference’ can stand as a mediating incantation that might create a layer between the constructed image of the ‘everyday’ given to us by science, technological social networks and the means of its construction.

The Transdisciplinary Imaging Conference presents speakers from a wide range of disciplines discussing:

• Can art interfere with the chaotic storms of data visualization and information processing, or is it merely eulogizing contemporary media?
• Can we think of ‘interference’ as a key tactic for the contemporary image in disrupting and critiquing the continual flood of constructed imagery?
• Are contemporary forms and strategies of interference the same as historical ones? What kinds of similarities and differences exist?

I had thought that 'interference strategies for art' were mainly undertaken by disgruntled gallery attendants and - as you've recently experienced yourself - cantankerous librarians but it would seem that 'acclaimed professionals' are also at it...

Charles Geneviève Louis Auguste André Timothée d'Éon de Beaumont, to give her full name, is one of the most important transvestites in history. She was "a fascinating and inspirational figure", said Lucy Peltz, the gallery's curator of 18th-century portraits.

"We are absolutely delighted to be able to acquire this portrait. D'Eon is a particularly fascinating and important figure from 18th-century British history."

The painting was discovered by the London dealer Philip Mould at a provincial sale outside New York last year. It was being mistakenly sold as a portrait of an unknown woman by Gilbert Stuart, most famous for painting George Washington on the dollar bill.

"Even in its dirty state it was quite clear that this woman had stubble," said Mould, who bought it, brought it to the UK and began further research and restoration.

"Cleaning is always a revelation and on this occasion it revealed that not only was it in lovely condition but, more pertinently, the Gilbert Stuart signature cleaned off revealing the name Thomas Stewart, a theatrical painter working in London in the 1780s and 1790s."

Everything then began to click into place. "What is so unusual about this portrait is that it is so brazenly demonstrative in a period when you don't normally get that type of alternative persona expressed in portraiture," said Mould. There is no attempt to soften his physiognomy – basically, he was a bloke in a dress with a hat."

The discovery was tremendously exciting, said Mould. "We are the main dealers in British portraiture, doing it for something like 30 years and I must have sold two or three thousand British portraits to museums and institutions – but never have I come across something quite so idiosyncratic. I've never had anything which is so off-beam."

Buying art as  a "safe haven"?  Very possibly, if what you have in mind is the idea that art will rise in value more than other sorts of investments these days, or at least not drop in value (like people pulling money out of euros to hold their money in USA dollars).  But there is another take: if directly financial investments are seen as going nowhere, or worse, then maybe some of those with money on hand feel they might as well spend it on something with substance that may provide lasting enjoyment.  From this point of view, those with a great deal of money might buy expensive art -- including from Mould Galleries, and congratulations for that !! -- while those with much less might buy from lesser-known artists they like.  Maybe this view is too optimistic, if that is the right word.  And of course, you know your own buyers!

The matching coat and dress, designed by Angela Kelly, the queen's senior dresser, were made in a cosy wool. It wasn't all pragmatism, though. That single organza frill on her coat was purely decorative, as were the dashing feathers on that hat.

But function is never far away in the monarch's choices. That brim was broad enough to keep the worst of any downpour at bay, but not melodramatically wide.

And, naturally, it was all richly emblematic. The outfit included allusions to her three jubilees as well as a reference to her distant ancestor Elizabeth I, who wore a Tudor, farthingaled version in the Ditchley portrait. Angela Kelly says that over the years the queen has taught her a huge amount about regal symbolism. The outfit was, apparently, a year in the planning.

“There was no particular point to it, I’m not anti-Royal. I just thought it would be funny.”

Was there a greater character in history than Vincent Van Gogh? After all this is a man who chopped off his ear in the name of love. With the Vincent Van Gogh Action Figure, you can see him before and after his self-conducted surgery; with 2 ears or with bandaged head. Place the Vincent Van Gogh Action Figure in front of easel with interchangeable versions of his mini masterpieces. Celebrate one of the world's favorite artists or use him as an inspirational tool. Specs: 5-1/4" inches tall vinyl figure Two interchangeable heads Comes with a paintbrush, palette, an easel, a frame and some mini masterpieces to display. Illustrated blister card.