Stanley Whitney - Painter
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ก.พ. 2014
- Artist Stanley Whitney discusses his career and the evolution of his work from the 1970s through the present. Professor emeritus of painting and drawing at Tyler School of Art, Temple University, Whitney holds a BFA from Kansas City Art Institute and an MFA from Yale University. Born in Philadelphia, he lives and works in New York City and Parma, Italy. He is represented by Team Gallery, New York; Galerie Nordenhake, Berlin; Galerie Albert Baronian, Brussels; and Christine Koenig Gallery, Vienna.
I really love Stanley Whitney and am grateful you posted this talk.
Stanley Whitney makes EXCELLENT 👌 paintings!!!! Great artist!!!!
I love Stanley.
He was a wonderful teacher.
Hello ! I am a french art student from Le Louvre trying to contact mister Whitney for an interview, would you know how I could get in touch with him ? That would be very helpful !
A trend for many older painters is to start painting stripes, rectangles and cubes. A way out from something that repets it self.
lovely paintings and amazing drawings . the strength. confidence and ability to keep things simple and yet complex in their simplicity .
One day I'll be there speaking too...
His color composition seems to be confined to the rectangle, (of course, I haven't seen any other work of his but this) - I venture to guess that Whitney's color composition would explode "exponentially" If he applied color to his free-form drawings - Love Whitney's work - he brings credence to ambiguity - :-) - refreshing new Artist for me thank you for the upload -
Excellent work!
The colors seem to have the lively bounce of music
Beautful colourful paintings
Great work. Not exactly sure if refering to himself as a Signature Painter is an obstacle to creation vs a career enhancer.
Enjoyed his journey far more than this destination. Stuck is the word that keeps coming to mind after seeing the repetitive stacked color paintings. This was published in 2014 - maybe his work has evolved since then. The quilt like quality and the lack of any kind of movement in the work is it's biggest drawback for me. There is a comment here about Paul Klee. Klee spent a lot of time figuring out the balance and physics of color and elements on the canvas - Whitney's stacks are more like shelves - everything is arranged but it has no where to go. Each color block is a separate product which, for me, make his paintings feel like they are made on a production line. I would love to see him go back to his drawing and possibly break this habit.
It does seem strange that he seems totally detached from these paintings and maybe this is because of the production line, formulaic approach that marks his working process.
Whitney has a Paul Klee connotation about him -
I like his drawings a lot maybe better than his paintings? His drawings force him out of his box, pun intended -
Very unsure about this artist!
I'm staggered he ever got anywhere as an artist and art like his is the reason we need to be able to identify bad art when we see it. Not everybody gets a free pass just because they've made a name for themselves, and when decades go by with a seemingly intentional lack of creativity, I think it's okay to call bullshit.
I think it's far more likely that you just have poor taste.
@@Joshua-yr2zm And you must be a reason shit like this becomes so famous. Listen to him talk. Listen to the ambiguity. And simply look at the work! When elementary art like this becomes famous, it has usually never been done before, as in the cases of Mondrian or Pollock. Mondrian was answering to architecture in many ways; Pollock to formlessness. Whitney here is taking advantage of the willing participants that are his viewers and is exploiting what it means to be an artist. He is not breaking ground. He is not on a profound mission reflected in his work. He is reducing the room to idiots who can't be bold enough to ask him to leave. He may not be talentless, but there is no originality or creativity in a portfolio spanning decades and that to me is a good enough reason to reject him.
@@pope400 you are an idiot
The work looks easy but you try it and you will see that it looks wrong and it doesnt work .
Revisiting this lecture as I am trying to understand color a bit better as an artist. Sometimes a series of work can often span decades as the artist tunnels deeper into the nuances of each small move or change. There’s a lot going on from a painterly perspective if you think about the small shifts he’s made from layering and then eventually into flatness that is being exhibited in his more recent work. Whether or not you support the conceptual nature of his pursuit, there’s something to be said about the journey and conviction that he has embarked on. I’ve often thought that one experimental painting in my studio could breed an infinite number of those works through small shifts that contrast against the previous works in the series. Kudos to Whitney for finding stability as an artist and with a collector base to support his investigation into this curiosity. I also bet these look entirely different IRL when you can see his hand in the work up close. Great painter
Sean Scully is a master. His work is amazing. Not sure about the Stanley's paintings . it is just predictable and boring .
whitney > scully ya scumbag
I like stanley whitney more, less serious than scully.