Chuck Close
Bob 1970
synthetic polymer paint on canvas
275.0 (h) x 213.5 (w) cm
inscribed verso l.r., crayon, ' "Bob" 1970 Close'
Purchased 1975
NGA 1975.151
The first two times i entered the NGA i thought 'Bob' was just a large photograph. I liked it but kept walking and never gave it much thought. This time when i realised it was a painting i was dumbfounded. The fact that it is so perfect that it is near impossible to make out a brush stroke untill you are are around 20cm away from the canvas awe inspiring. Close even said about 'Bob', "I had taken a break and was walking back into the studio. Looking at the painting, I realised that a highlight in one of the eyes was too bright. And I said, 'Damn it, now I'm going to have to take his glasses off'. But when I realised what I had said, I pivoted on my heel and walked out leaving the lights on, the compressor on and the airbrushes full of paint. When you start believing in your own illusion, you're in serious trouble"
Not only is the artists technical skill captivating, the gaze of the subject is draws the viewer in as he seems strangely alert or perhaps supprised. It is not the traditional mug shot or "smile!" style.
Least enjoyed
Jo Baer
Untitled (vertical flanking diptych - red) 1966-74
oil on canvas
canvas (each) 244.0 (h) x 172.7 (w) cm
overall 244.0 (h) x 376.0 (w) cm
not signed, not dated
Purchased 1973
I disliked this work purely because it bored me. I am aware that it is a famous Minimalist painting and was most likely controversial when first displayed. I also aware that it baer was trying to convey how works like Untitled (vertical flanking diptych - red) can be just as meaningful as paintings of three dimentional objects. This being said, when i walk into the NGA and am overwhelmed by visual stimulus in every direction, i cant help but be irritated by two blank pannels which just make me think 'oh, another artist trying to push the boundries of conventional art'.
Bibliography
http://nga.gov.au/
No comments:
Post a Comment