Paul Emsley presents Catharine, Duchess of Cambridge

When Royal Portraits go Bad

Emsley's controversial 2013 portrait

   Royal portrait commissions have a long history.  Henry VIII commissioned the English court painter Hans Holbein to go paint the otherwise unseen Anne of Cleves to determine whether or not she was marriage material.  Apparently, Holbein and her portrait thought yes.  Henry disagreed and art historians have long puzzled over how Holbein did not lose his head.

    Royal portraitist and first prize 2007 BP Portrait Award recipient, Paul Emsley is possibly grateful that times have changed (and that his subject is already safely married to William, Duke of Cambridge).

    Despite the Duchess’ polite claims to the contrary, her first official portrait as an HRH could have come off better.  Less polite critics have labeled Emsley’s effort as disappointing, even renaming the work, vampire princess, noting that the portrait more seemingly resembles the style of the popular Twilight films than a royal portrait.

   Why should we care?  Royal portraits do more than introduce a sovereign to his or her people, they are a record of the generations to which they belong.  Two hundred years from now, schoolchildren will visit the Royal Portrait Gallery for insights as to the lives and personalities of their great-great-great grandparents.  Kate's portrait is more than an idle curiosity to us for she is our ambassador to the ages and this is how she will be formally presented. 

Jonesing for Depth

Quinn's Planet, courtesy London Telegraph

Jonathan Jones Joneses for Artistic Depth

    In his 21 January review, Jonathan Jones, arts and culture critic for London’s The Guardian Newspaper, dropped the gauntlet over popular British artist Marc Quinn’s giant baby sculpture, Planet, and its installation in Singapore’s scenic Gardens by the Sea.

    Jones’ criticism is direct rather than rhetorical.  Does art need to be deep?  Inaccessible?  Clever?  Challenging?  How is it that we will choose to determine what is or is not considered art in a foundation-less (stated positively) Postmodern global culture? 

    I do enjoy The Guardian’s often thoughtful criticism, and appreciate Jones’ perspective in this case, but too often, I also wonder if The Guardian is not merely the UK’s contra-cultural, anti-establishment perspective – often appearing disagreeable merely to disagree. 

Quinn and Planet at Singapore installation, courtesy Artnews.com

    Indeed, there appears to be some disagreement with Jones’ perception.  Artnews.com confidently judges, “Planet is one of Marc Quinn’s most important works. The sculpture, which is a depiction of the artist’s infant son, appears to float above the ground and is a technical tour-de-force,” (Artnews, below).

    I think that in consideration of today’s cultural norms, Jones is being a bit hypercritical.  Consider the fate and present veneration of The Pearl, formerly at the heart of Manama, Bahrain. 

Cheaper by the Baker's Dozen

 1.      Francis Picabia, Volupté (1932), $130K

2.      Joan Miró, Femme (Femme debout) (1969), $4.5M -$8M

3.      Joan Miró, Femme, étoile (1942), $500K-$800K.

4.      Joan Miró, L’echelle d’évasion (Escape Ladder) (1939), $800K - $1.3M

5.      Joan Miró, Signes et figurations, $1M- $1.5M

6.      Joan Miró, Tête (1970), $800K - $1.1M

7.      Max Ernst, La Forêt (1934/35), $50K-$80K

8.      Max Ernst, Roter Gratenwald mit Sonne (Red Forest with Sun) (1936), $650K-$1M

9.      Paul Delvaux, ecce homo (la descendre de croix) (1949), $1M - $1.4M

10.   Paul Delvaux, La Première Rose (1947), $1.6M - $2.4M

11.   Paul Delvaux, Les nymphes des eaux (1938).  $5M-$8M

12.   René Magritte, A la rencontre du plaisir (1950), $2M-$3M

13.   René Magritte, La traverse difficile (II) (1946), $400K-$600K

14.   opt.  Edvard Munch, Robat pa sjøen (1904), $1M

 

Cheaper by the Baker’s Dozen

Or… if I had $10 Million Dollars … I’d Buy Us a … Miró, a Delvaux and a Munch

    I would never actually advise anyone as to what art they should or should not consider purchasing, but while reading Hedley Twidle’s interesting article about South African Nobel Literary Laureate John M. Coetzee in the Financial Times, I noted the advertisement for Christie’s upcoming Surrealist Art Auction in London (08 Feb, 2013), and could not resisting clicking on the teaser icon.  “Hmmm, I see…”

    Truthfully, I have a love and hate relationship with Surrealism, but many of the pieces in this particular auction draw closer to Modernism than to Surrealism, though all are definitely impacted by Surrealist forms and theory.  The first few selections in their slide show did not hold my attention.  They were fine, but not of the quality or the creativity I would expect for those prices.  But after imagining the excitement the wives of attorneys, Freshmen Congressmen and the other Long Island types whom I assume bid on such pieces, I caught a glimpse of Joan Miró’s Femme – a large, brilliant sculpture in black matte-finish bronze … And the expected price range for the piece?  A mere $4.5 million.  “Nice – I’d sure like to see the commission on that one,”  I thought to myself.

    Going through the slideshow catalogue, I noted several other Miró’s that I felt to be rather special and a few other works by other artists, ending up with a baker’s dozen-or-so that I felt would be well worth the trip to view.  The combined recommended minimum for the full dozen, roughly a cool $19.5 Millions – not really so bad if you really think about it.