I don't understand why you are attacking Peyton. Her paintings are very refreshing and she's a sincere artist. Does she honestly give the vibe, "my husband got me a museum retrospective show and I am just oh so hip" Her work very much fits in at Whitechapel. Have you ever seen either in person?
Also, how does her use of source material not reflect our society today? I'm not sure what you are talking about in regards to looking at the history of painting, but please, feel free to elaborate. Perhaps you are referring to the craft of painting, which included commissions, many of which used assistants to execute, many of which used camera lucidas and obscuras, graphs, and measuring formulas to paint very direct religious and political depictions for the simpletons too uneducated to read.
Student grade? Okay first of all. You never answered my question. Secondly, you're not looking at this in any context. Post-modernism is definitely about context and Peyton's work was definitely very new to the 90's. I understand where you are coming from in some regard, although not when speaking about this specific artist. Figure painting was pretty dead for a while, let alone portraiture. This is coming out of the 80's.
I saw Gerhard Richter's Atlas at White Chapel and very much enjoyed it. It was mentioned that Peyton's work fits in with the gallery and I'm not sure about that. Peyton's one of those artists which I cannot understand. While colourful, I find the work pretty bland. Neither her handling of material nor the subject matter seem to say anything worth mentioning. What she says in this video doesn't appear to illuminate the paintings, either. If you like her work already, you may find it interesting, but it will not compel those who want to dig deeper.
conclusion:'i paint famous people with my crappy painting skill, i meant to depict their soullessness with my soulless touch of stroke and color. my paintings go for a lot of money. my husband got me a museum retrospective show and i am just so hip' end of conversation
Tell me how glorifying is it to be painting pop cultural idols mimicking certain aspects of photography but overall ending up being student grade? Tell me how deserving is it to have a "respective show" at a museum signifying trends and gimmick of what is hot in ny? I actually think the last one is well deserved. perfect fit, just that I am annoyed by the words ' museum' and ' retrospective'
Well I am not sure if I can be sympathetic about your lack of understanding about something so obvious. I am not jealous about her success at all. I just don't believe that people can literally call her crap refreshing and sincere. It is not her problem to making shitty art, it is problematic when people embrace it as treasure, without looking at the history of painting and determine this is as sincere. Tell me how sincere it is to paint from a photo of fashion magazine like Vogue?
People just like what they like, though!? Different art means different things to different people. And art exists because sometimes words aren't enough. Some things are just beyond words, whether others think they are worth tuppence or not. Like some people support Manchester United and other like bee-keeping. People. Are. Different. Opinions. Are. Different. Art. Is. Subjective
thanks for the post, thanks for being so candid and honest elizabeth
I don't understand why you are attacking Peyton. Her paintings are very refreshing and she's a sincere artist. Does she honestly give the vibe, "my husband got me a museum retrospective show and I am just oh so hip" Her work very much fits in at Whitechapel. Have you ever seen either in person?
Also, how does her use of source material not reflect our society today? I'm not sure what you are talking about in regards to looking at the history of painting, but please, feel free to elaborate. Perhaps you are referring to the craft of painting, which included commissions, many of which used assistants to execute, many of which used camera lucidas and obscuras, graphs, and measuring formulas to paint very direct religious and political depictions for the simpletons too uneducated to read.
Student grade? Okay first of all. You never answered my question. Secondly, you're not looking at this in any context. Post-modernism is definitely about context and Peyton's work was definitely very new to the 90's.
I understand where you are coming from in some regard, although not when speaking about this specific artist. Figure painting was pretty dead for a while, let alone portraiture. This is coming out of the 80's.
I saw Gerhard Richter's Atlas at White Chapel and very much enjoyed it. It was mentioned that Peyton's work fits in with the gallery and I'm not sure about that.
Peyton's one of those artists which I cannot understand. While colourful, I find the work pretty bland. Neither her handling of material nor the subject matter seem to say anything worth mentioning.
What she says in this video doesn't appear to illuminate the paintings, either. If you like her work already, you may find it interesting, but it will not compel those who want to dig deeper.
conclusion:'i paint famous people with my crappy painting skill, i meant to depict their soullessness with my soulless touch of stroke and color. my paintings go for a lot of money. my husband got me a museum retrospective show and i am just so hip'
end of conversation
Whats??
Tell me how glorifying is it to be painting pop cultural idols mimicking certain aspects of photography but overall ending up being student grade? Tell me how deserving is it to have a "respective show" at a museum signifying trends and gimmick of what is hot in ny? I actually think the last one is well deserved. perfect fit, just that I am annoyed by the words ' museum' and ' retrospective'
Well I am not sure if I can be sympathetic about your lack of understanding about something so obvious. I am not jealous about her success at all. I just don't believe that people can literally call her crap refreshing and sincere. It is not her problem to making shitty art, it is problematic when people embrace it as treasure, without looking at the history of painting and determine this is as sincere. Tell me how sincere it is to paint from a photo of fashion magazine like Vogue?
People just like what they like, though!? Different art means different things to different people. And art exists because sometimes words aren't enough. Some things are just beyond words, whether others think they are worth tuppence or not. Like some people support Manchester United and other like bee-keeping. People. Are. Different. Opinions. Are. Different. Art. Is. Subjective
@popeyeisgood hehe yeeeeaaa i heard some more but whatever thats just me
Meow.