Monday, August 23, 2010
Observe! You Budding Artists
At the art school at the University of Washington I was exposed to a number of training practices that, in retrospect, weren't very useful. Check that: even at the time I had my doubts, but was too naïve and trusting to fully realize that I was being shortchanged.
I'll provide more details in future posts, but for now will deal with the matter of viewing subjects. When presented with a still life setup or human model or whatever, an instructor would often tell us to "observe" or "see."
Just what we were supposed to observe was seldom made clear. They did teach us to hold a paintbrush handle between us and the subject, arm stiff, to measure or compare dimensions of what we were painting. And that's about all the "observing" I could manage given my state of ignorance.
The problem that cropped up again and again in many of my art school classes was that the faculty was collectively afraid to actually teach us much of anything in fear of destroying our precious creativity. Or maybe it was art school policy. I don't know for sure, but those were the vibrations I absorbed; lord knows we got little actual instruction.
Many years later, I'm beginning to understand what they were talking about -- at least in the case of drawing or painting a human likeness. Provided an artist knows the shapes and proportions for the expected or average case, then, when he studies a subject, he can compare what he sees with the norm. That is, he might notice that the distance from the bottom of the nose to the chin tends large or small and the eyes are narrower or wider-set than expected.
Clearly such observations can be made by fledgling, under-trained art students such as I was. But the process of observing becomes faster and more sure when looking for variations about a norm rather than trying to figure things out from scratch.
Another example might be rules-of-thumb dealing with light and shade. These hold that, in most cases, warm light results in a cool (blue tinted) shadow and cool light produces warm (i.e., with touches of brown, purple, etc.) shadows. I was never taught these rules. If I had, then I might have been better able to "observe" my subject and decide whether or not the rules held in that instance. Put another way, why were we supposed to discover such things on our own? I didn't "discover" this information until I read in in books -- and might never have.
What, then, was the point of having an art faculty to "teach" us if they would not teach?
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Incredible Shrinking Magazines
Time to add a few more points to the declining media curve.
Today's Sunday newspaper insert, Parade magazine, struck me as being a fragment of its former self. Years ago, if memory serves, its dimensions were someplace between those of a news magazine and a tabloid paper, edging in the direction of the former. I don't recall how many pages an issue typically boasted, but it had at least a little heft -- call it 36-48.
The latest Parade measures 9.5 inches high by nine inches wide when closed. The page count?: 16.
Meanwhile, over at a newsstand, I did something I almost never do any more: I examined Time and Newsweek. Their 23 August editions each had only 64 pages, which felt pretty thin. I grabbed three copies of 1955-56 Newsweek from my archive and their page counts ranged from 92 to 114. (Those issues had cover stories about cars. I'll probably get around to posting about what was written.)
I wonder why they bother to keep Parade alive when it contains so little in its page-deficient, small format. And if Newsweek was sold for $1 (yes, the buyer assumed debt), then what might Time be worth?
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Analysis: Jaguar Styling Trends
I think it's good policy for an automobile make to stick with design themes. Exception: when the brand has a bad reputation and there's the need to divorce new, presumably improved, models from previous parking lot trash.
Examples of styling cue continuity are the Rolls-Royce radiator grille (only recently modified, but still recognizable), Cadillac's egg-crate grille theme (initiated for the 1941 model year) and Packard's red hexagon wheel decorations, grille-top design and pen-nib upper body trim strip.
Other makes don't bother much with theme maintenance. And I'll admit that sales results aren't always bad: consider Toyota which doesn't seem to have any consistent cue other than the crossed-oval "T" symbol on most grilles.
Jaguar management decided a few years ago to drop their policy of theme-continuation in favor of establishing new themes. At first, this was not evident, but enough new models have appeared that the themes are becoming somewhat clear.
Let's begin by reviewing examples of Jaguar styling since World War 2.
The XK-120 created a sensation when introduced: sleek style, good performance and a comparatively low price for what the buyer was getting. Styling cues include: the vertically positioned oval grille; inset, faired headlights; and curvacious fenders and general profile. These were carried over to the 2.4 sedan. Details changed, but the styling sense was similar. The S-Type was a vintage-2000 Ford platform with retro detailing that evoked the 2.4 and its successor, the 3.4. To me, these cars scream Jaguar.
After the XK-120, -140, -150 string ran out, Jaguar introduced the thematically different XK-E (or E-Type) whose styling reflected racing models such as the C-Type and D-Type that ran at Le Mans. The current sports model, the XK, isn't as tubular in proportions as the E, but its horizontally-aligned oval grille echoes that of the E.
Jaguar's larger Mark VII sedans carried over a pre-war grille design, mating it to the postwar swept-through fender treatment that was a stamp of modernity at the time. The XJ6 and related models up to the mid-2000-10 decade XJs featured a grille that was essentially a flattened version of that of the Mark VII.
To summarize, Jaguar styling from 1948 until 2009 (that's 60 years!) featured three themes exemplified by grille treatment (though other cues were present). One was an oval grille oriented vertically. Another was an oval grille (actually, more of an opening for radiator air) that was horizontal. The one reserved for larger sedans (plus the 2001-09 X-Type small sedan -- not pictured) was a series of variations on a prewar design.
Below are photos of two models that represent what may be assumed to be Jaguar styling themes for the foreseeable future.
The XF medium-size sedan and the new, large XJ have a similar front treatment. Grilles are roughly rectangular but with strongly radiused corners. The headlamp treatment of the XF hints at the inset headlights of the XK-120, but this becomes simply a wisp on the XJ. Both models feature a jaguar-head medallion placed in the grille.
Aside from the front, the XF's styling is generic-sleek, the only Jaguar element being an image of the animal tacked on the rear. From the side, the car could easily be mistaken for a Lexus. The XJ has the potential to be more distinctive in the form of the window pattern and the vertical tail lights. In any case, the car cannot be mistaken for a Lexus. I've yet to see an XJ where I live, but saw several in London recently and can attest to its distinctiveness.
Now that the new front theme is on two models -- and not simply on the XF -- the potential exists that it can become a Jaguar styling signature, through force of repetition, if nothing else. Nevertheless, side and rear treatments don't offer many clues for the future, the XJ being a successful first step and the XF less so.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Bumper Sticker Tracking: Year 3
When I was blogging at the late, lamented 2Blowhards site I'd occasionally post about political bumper stickers. One subject was a Prius in northeast Seattle that had its rear pretty well covered. Because I drive past its home fairly often and kept seeing it, the idea finally flashed that it might be interesting to photograph the car once a year to show if there were any additions or deletions inspired by changing political winds.
Carrying on the tradition, herewith is the 2010 Prius bumper sticker update.
Seattle is a solidly liberal town, so most cars I see with political stickers display messages from that part of the spectrum. The images are a little fuzzy, but they can be enlarged enough to read most of the print by clicking on them (this works with my iMac, anyway).
There was minimal change between presidential election year 2008 and off-year 2009. A European Union sticker was added to the right of the license plate and one for the Democrat running for Congress in district WA-8 toward the lower edge of the bumper; this probably was affixed in the fall of 2008 before the election (she lost).
New for this summer are a sticker for the NPR radio station (to the left of the license plate) and the blue one at the lower right with the word IRV (I'm not sure what it's about). The "Outsource Bush" sticker in the lower center of the bumper has been replaced by one stating "My America Doesn't Tourture."
My take is that the owner isn't nearly as agitated as he was when the car was newer and most of the stickers appeared. Apparently he's content with Democrat control of the White House and dominance in both houses of Congress -- expected sentiments. I do find the anti-torture sticker a little puzzling because that issue faded with the election of Obama.
I will continue to monitor the Prius and report any startling changes.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Grumpy About Wagner
Yesterday I sat through the Seattle Opera's production of Richard Wagner's Tristn und Isolde (hereafter, T&I). And boy did it make me grumpy.
I suppose some of this is because I'm not a strong music fan in the first place and attend opera only because my wife would be very disappointed if I didn't accompany her to one.
The Wikipedia link above goes into a good deal of detail regarding T&I's background, plot and reactions to it over time. Apparently a number of well-known composers were enthralled by it and historians of music say the it was an influential work. Of course one can point to the artists who regarded Paul Cézanne highly and how influential his work was. That doesn't mean one absolutely must like T&I or Cézanne's paintings. I don't like either one.
My first problem with T&I was its length; with intermissions it ran four hours and 40 minutes. Three hours would be much more tolerable.
Secondly, the plot had very little action. Many important events were manifested in the form of characters singing about what had happened someplace or other off-stage: why couldn't those events have been dramatized?
Instead (point three), I had to suffer through a 40-minute stretch of the second act where Isolde and the love-potioned Tristan went through what I took to be a bunch of two-bit philosophizing and analogy-making about love. I quickly reached the point where I stopped reading the captions and gave serious thought to falling asleep, my time being cruelly wasted by matters that could have been disposed of in five or ten minutes.
T&I is a sung-through opera with no set-piece arias. No memorable melodies either, at least none that I caught. I also didn't pick up on leitmotifs that were supposedly there. So the music (which tended to underline sung thoughts or emotions) was lush, but to a large extent nondescript to my unmusical ears.
So for me T&I was basically a waste of time and money.
Many will disagree, and that's fine. I'm just venting here and don't expect to convert anyone to my point of view. Moreover I find that most operas are tedious, chewing up plenty of time where nothing much happens. And the songs about love strike the 2010 me as insipid even though they must have great appeal to 1880 others.
T&I was my third Wagner opera (after Der fliegende Holländer and Die Walküre), so three strikes and he's out, so far as I'm concerned.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
What did Josephine Look Like?
What did certain people who lived before the age of photography really look like?
In many cases, we can't be sure even where portraits are available. That's because some painters lacked the skill to render a good likeness. Other painters might have produced flattering images of their subjects.
One possible solution to this problem is to assemble a set of images by different artists and compare them. Where they tend to agree, it's fairly likely that is how the subject actually appeared.
As a test, let's look at a collection of images of Napoleon's first wife, the Empress Josephine. Several of the images shown are unfamiliar to me, so it's possible that I wasn't wise to rely on identifications provided by the Web sites I used as sources. I also wasn't able to identify the artist in some cases because no identification was provided. Cautionary notes aside, the focus should be on what the images tell us.
I suspect that sculptors tend to do more realistic images than painters, though they too might be tempted to flatter their subjects.
None of the images shows an open mouth -- but few if any portraits before 1900 showed teeth anyway. What we do see is a small, slightly pinched mouth in nearly every image. Why? This source states that "her blackened and rotting teeth were a direct result of the sugar saturated cuisine consumed during her childhood" in Martinique.
The 1814 painting and perhaps the one by Gérard suggest a fuller face than the rest, which indicate more of a V-shape. The Appiani painting is the only one that doesn't clearly show brown eyes.
Otherwise, there seems to be agreement that she had hooded eyelids, the tops of which sit under a strong ridge further defined by eyebrows that are fairly thick where they meet the nose. She also had strong cheekbones and a generally straight nose with a relatively flat underside. Her hair appears to be dark brown, and she favored wearing it with bangs in the front and upswept or collected at the back.
The most attractive depictions, I think, are the busts by Chinard and the sketch by Prud'hon -- which agree in most details. I would like to think this was how she really looked, even though a fuller face might have been the reality.
Too bad Daguerre didn't invent photography 30 years earlier (sigh).
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
The Painter Who Filled Sargent's Shoes
This summer London's National Portrait Gallery has been hosting a small exhibit of portraits by Philip Alexius de László (1869-1937), who in 1907 took over the role of Britain's top society portraitist after John Singer Sargent proclaimed that he was fed up with all that.
The de László Wikipedia entry is here and the artist's Web site is here.
De László was born in the Pest side of Budapest and received training in Hungary, Munich and Paris. He led a cosmopolitan existence as he gained fame and wealth painting portraits, but maintained an imposing home/studio in Budapest until his Irish wife persuaded him to move to London in 1907. Aside from a rough patch (house arrest) during the later part of the Great War, he thrived in England while sallying to the continent and America from time to time to execute other commissions.
László was skilled at painting men and children, but he is best known for portraits of women.
This was commissioned by Lord Curzon who was the notorious novelist's lover at the time (just before she was jilted).
This painting was done as a demonstration: details here.
Yes, it's the "Queen Mum" and this painting, on loan from HM Queen Elizabeth II, was one of the highlights of the NPG show.
Rivaling the Queen Elizabeth portrait at the small NPG exhibit is this one of the Duchess of Portland when she was nearing 50.
Like many other representational artists his his era and earlier, de László's reputation collapsed following his death. While Sargent, Anders Zorn, Joaquin Sorolla and Giovanni Boldini have been rehabilitated to some degree, de László remains something of an unknown. Reasons advanced for this include: (1) he was too facile, able to complete paintings in six or fewer sittings, (2) he painted aristocracy, a no-no in an era where egalitarianism dominated lip-service; and (3) the fact that most of his paintings remain in private collections rather than being "visible" in museums. This last problem was slightly mitigated by a 2004 Christie's exhibit in London and the current NPG exhibit mentioned above.
My take? I like de László's portraits a lot. They're unlike Sargent's in that he tended to paint "thinner" -- not so much paint on the brush. This makes his portraits slightly less dramatic. But he created good likenesses that are interesting to view even where we don't know what the subject looked like. He was hugely in demand for excellent reasons.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)