On Oct 16, 2008, at 3:06 PM, Chris Miller wrote:
Are the works of the leading commission portrait painters of today
ever hung
in major museums ?
Why would they be hung there, instead of in the sitter's home or
office? "Nice portrait. I like my chin and ear, you know. Here's
$30,000 for the picture. Luvverly. I'll give it to the museum now. ...
Oh, hmmm. They don't know who I am and don't want it. Oh, well. There
goes the tax write-off."
While we're on the subject of portraiture, why does Miller not mention
the paintings of Neel, Klimt, Picasso, and many others--actual
portraits, done as such, and not just a distorted modernist picture of
a known sitter--Modigliani, Diebenkorn, Freud (including a portrait of
the Queen, no less, who actually sat for him, not just an exercise of
copying a photo), etc. etc.
I wish somebody would speak up and ask if Miller means only portraits
in the academic style of recognizable pictorial techniques,
draughtswomanship, aesthetically authorized chiaroscuro and tennebrist
effects, and good foreshortening, too.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Michael Brady
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
