Friday, August 12, 2005

Banksy in the Studio

A guide to cutting stencils

� Think from outside the box.
� Collapse the box and take a fucking sharp knife to it.

� Leave the house before you find something worth staying in for.

� Spray the paint sparingly onto the stencil from a distance of 8 inches.

� Be aware that going on a major mission totally drunk out of your head will result in some truly spectacular artwork and at least one night in the cells.

� When explaining yourself to the Police its worth being as reasonable as possible. Graffiti writers are not real villains. I am always reminded of this by real villains who consider the idea of breaking in someplace, not stealing anything and then leaving behind a painting of your name in four foot high letters the most retarded thing they ever heard of.

� Remember crime against property is not real crime. People look at an oil painting and admire the use of brushstrokes to convey meaning. People look at a graffiti painting and admire the use of a drainpipe to gain access.

� The time of getting fame for your name on its own is over. Artwork that is only about wanting to be famous will never make you famous. Any fame is a by-product of making something that means something. You don't go to a restaurant and order a meal because you want to have a shit.

Check out Banksy

Friday, July 01, 2005

Hidden da Vinci sketch uncovered




Hidden da Vinci sketch uncovered Drawing discovered under his painting of ‘Virgin on the Rocks’
The Associated Press
Updated: 1:10 p.m. ET July 1, 2005

LONDON - National Gallery experts using infrared techniques have discovered a Leonardo da Vinci sketch hidden underneath a painting by the Italian master, conservationists said Friday.
The sketch — the first unknown Leonardo image to be found in decades — is beneath the delicate brushstrokes of the artist's "Virgin on the Rocks," a powerful scene of Christ's mother in a dusky cavern, which hangs in the London museum.

The concealed image shows a woman with one hand clutched to her breast, the other outstretched, kneeling before what experts said was planned to be an infant Jesus. Leonardo apparently was planning a picture of the adoration of the Christ child, a scene popular with Renaissance artists, but changed his mind.

"It came as a complete surprise to finding the sketch," said Rachel Billinge, research associate in the conservation department of the National Gallery. "We had no idea until we studied the painting that there was anything under there."

The National Gallery's "Virgin on the Rocks" is a copy of the painting of the same name that now hangs in the Louvre in Paris. National Gallery experts were using infrared techniques to find out how the copy had been made when they found the sketch.
The Roman Catholic church had commissioned Leonardo to paint "The Virgin on the Rocks" for a Milan chapel altarpiece in 1483.

"When (Leonardo) completed the first painting, he was so pleased with it that he asked for more money, and when this was refused, he sold it privately," Billinge said.
The artist later agreed to paint another picture — and probably started with the newly found sketch — but was persuaded to make a copy of the original "Virgin On The Rocks," she said.
The copy was placed in the chapel in 1508.

Critics argue over the meaning of the scene in "The Virgin On The Rocks." Some claim it depicts the Immaculate Conception, while others say it shows the first time Jesus met John the Baptist.
The last time any new Leonardo works were discovered was the 1930s, when the portrait "Ginevra de'Benci" and "The Madonna of the Carnation" were attributed to him.
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8433482/

Saturday, June 25, 2005

Impression, Sunrise - June 2005 Painting


Artist: Claude Monet
Title: Impression, Sunrise (Impression, soleil levant)
Date: 1873

Location of Origin: Musee Marmotton, Paris
Medium: Oil on canvas
Style:
Impressionism


Impression, Sunrise (Impression, soleil levant) is a painting by Claude Monet, for which the Impressionist movement was named.

Dated 1872, but probably created in 1873, its subject is the harbour of Le Havre, using very loose brush strokes that suggest rather than delineate it. Monet explained the title later: "I was asked to give a title for the catalogue; I couldn't very well call it a view of Le Havre. So I said: 'Put Impression.'"

It was displayed in 1874 during at the first independent art show of the Impressionists (who were not yet known by that name). Critic Louis Leroy, inspired by the painting's name, titled his hostile review of the show in Le Charivari newspaper, "The Exhibition of the Impressionists", thus inadvertantly naming the new art movement. He wrote:

Impression - I was certain of it. I was just telling myself that, since I was impressed, there had to be some impression in it ... and what freedom, what ease of workmanship! Wallpaper in its embryonic state is more finished than that seascape.

This painting is also featured in the hit movie 'Thomas Crown Affair' which valued it for a whooping 100 Million US Dollars.



Sunday, May 22, 2005

Saint-Lazare Station - May 2005 Painting



Artist: Claude Monet
Title: Saint-Lazare Station
Date: 1877

Location of Origin: France
Medium: Oil on canvas
Style:
Impressionism


Painted in 1872 by Manet, Le Chemin de fer (The Railroad), also called La Gare Saint-Lazare (Washington, National Gallery of Art) still fascinates both historians and art critics. This is one of 12 paintings of the station by Monet. Breathtaking grace and detail, especially considering the subject. Following this, most of Monet's works focused on natural scenes.

"By his fellow painters Monet was regarded as a leader, not because he was the most intellectual or theoretically minded or because he was able to answer questions that they could not answer, but because in his art he seemed to be more alert to the possibilities latent in their common ideas, which he then developed in his work in a more radical way than did the others.

Considering how all these painters developed their intensely personal manners with respect to the new artistic ideas, we may observe that the new elements appeared most often for the first time in the work of Monet and then were taken over by the other Impressionists, who incorporated them as suggestions or as definite means and applied them in their own ways.

Monet showed the way, even if the development of the others seemed to diverge from his.
"There is still another reason for Monet's outstanding position as an Impressionist. If we compare his paintings over a short period with the paintings of the others, we see that while the others painted within a restricted range of ideas and even of feelings, so that the Renoirs of the period 1873-76 are characterized by the joyousness in a collective world of recreation described earlier, Monet, with his powerful, ever alert eye, was able to paint at the same time brilliant pictures and also rather grayed ones in neutral tones. He was more reactive, he had more of that quality that psychologists of that time called "Impressionability." That is to say, he was open to more varied stimuli from the common world that for these painters was the evident source of the subjects of their paintings.

"Monet could appear variable at any given moment, producing many surprising interpretations of the common matter. He altered his technique according to his sense of the quality of the whole, whether joyous or somber, that he wanted to construct in response to the powerful stimulus from the object that engaged him in the act of painting. Similarly, over the course of years, his art underwent a most remarkable general transformation.

The early work of Monet appears as a painting of directly seen objects characterized by great mobility and variety. His art is a world of streets and harbors, beaches, roads, and resorts, usually filled with human beings or showing many traces of human play and activity. In the late work, however, Monet excluded the human figure. There are practically no portraits and no figure paintings by Monet after the middle 1880s and few between 1879 and 1885. From that period, we can count all his figure paintings on one hand. He also gave up still life and painted no genre groups. He restricted himself to an increasingly silent and solitary world.

"When Monet traveled to Venice and London, he pictured those great cities from a distance, in fog or sunlight, without the clear presence of human beings and with no suggestion of their movement through that space. He tended, moreover, to shift from the painting of large to small fields; and, whereas at first the large fields were painted on small canvases, later he painted a small field - water in a nearby pool or a few flowers in his garden - life-size and seemingly larger than life, as if he wished to give a maximum concreteness and the most intimate presence to a small space that, although only a segment, was for him a complete world.

He moved in his art from a world with deep, horizontal planes in long perspectives - the paths of carriages and traffic - to a world in which the plane of the water or the ground seen from close by has been tilted upward and has become vertical, like the plane of a picture or mirror. The quality of landscape as the extended human environment, the old traversability of space, has been minimized in the later work.

Monet never painted a nude, and one may suspect that his vast world of nature and the theme of water played in his art the role that the fantasy about women or children or mothers played in the imagination of other artists. All his variety, from the stillness of the lilly pond to the awful turbulence of waves beating on the rocks, may have to do with the feelings or passions that in other artists can be recognized in their mythology and subjects or through a fanciful imagery of human figures."


Gardens were a recurrent theme for Monet in the 1870s, and paintings of his own garden dominate his later work. In 1890 he purchased a house in Giverny that he had been renting for seven years. He began to develop its gardens, introducing an ornamental lily pond and a Japanese-style bridge. These and other features of his idyllic estate were the subject of a steady output of large decorative paintings. He generally began by painting outdoors, but would then return to his studio to work and rework his canvases, which had become even more layered and complex than before.

The culminating honor of Monet's career was the installation in the Orangerie des Tuileries, a museum in central Paris, of monumental paintings of water lilies, on which he had worked for more than a decade preceding his death. In these works reality seems to dematerialize as he expresses the interplay of color, light, foliage, and reflection in a tangled mass of brushstrokes. With his eyesight beginning to fail in his final years, Monet explored his subject so closely and thoroughly that the whole dissolved into its parts and began to resemble abstract art.

More on Monet...

Friday, April 22, 2005

The Last Supper - April 2005 Painting


Artist: Leonardo da Vinci
Title: The Last Supper
Date: c. 1495-1498

Location of Origin: Italy
Medium: Fresco
Style:
Renaissance

Leonardo da Vinci is best remembered as the painter of the Mona Lisa (1503-1506) and The Last Supper (1495). But he's almost equally famous for his astonishing multiplicity of talents: he dabbled in architecture, sculpture, engineering, geology, hydraulics and the military arts, all with success, and in his spare time doodled parachutes and flying machines that resembled inventions of the 19th and 20th centuries. He made detailed drawings of human anatomy which are still highly regarded today. Leonardo also was quirky enough to write notebook entries in mirror (backwards) script, a trick which kept many of his observations from being widely known until decades after his death.

Leonardo da Vinci means "Leonardo from the town of Vinci," and thus he is generally referred to in short as "Leonardo" rather than as "da Vinci."

Leonardo da Vinci's painting on this subject is fairly interesting to look at and contains many subtle details that escape the notice of most people, as they simply see the typical religious scene. These details are somewhat disturbing and express somewhat heretical points of view. All references to the painting in this writeup are with the figure of Jesus at the center of the painting as reference, to avoid any confusion.

- Seated to the right of Jesus, turned away from him, is an unmistakably feminine figure. Commentators explain this away as being the disciple John (who is said to be very young), but note the very feminine bodice and facial features of the figure.
This female figure forms a letter "M" with Christ. To some commentators, this would indicate that the female figure is actually Mary Magdalene.
- A hand that cannot possibly belong to anyone visible at the table cuts across the female figure's neck.
- The sixth figure from the left of Jesus (the second figure from the left edge of the painting, in profile), looks almost exactly like Jesus himself. He is even dressed identically, the only difference is that the "real" Jesus has his robe draped on his left shoulder.
- There is a hand holding a dagger, positioned in such a way as to not belong to any of the figures on the table, pointed threateningly at the third person at the right side of Jesus.
- The first figure on Jesus' left side is raising his finger upwards in an expression that characterized John the Baptist in many of Leonardo's other works (e.g. his 1513-16 painting and his sculpture). From his facial expression it seems as if this figure is urging Jesus to remember John.
- The fifth figure on Jesus's left, turned away and with a disdainful expression, looks remarkably like Leonardo himself, as though he were expressing his own disdain for Jesus Christ.
-There does not seem to be any wine on the table, only bread apparently. It may seem like a minor quibble but the fact is both the bread and the wine were a major feature of the Last Supper. Not displaying "the blood of the new and everlasting covenant" that would be "shed for you and for all men so that sins may be forgiven" which is what the wine is supposed to symbolize is an attempt to minimize or nullify that symbolism.

These kinds of inconsistencies point to the fact that Leonardo may have been versed in a secret heretical tradition, perhaps the Mandaean heresy that believed Jesus to be an impostor who usurped the messiahship from John the Baptist. He may well have accepted the commission to produce such a patently Christian work as a means to secretly slip in some subversive doctrines to those who would take the time to look beyond the religious scene into what the painting really depicted. It would have been his joke on the exoteric power that suppressed his esoteric beliefs.

It could be a just mere coincidence if these inconsistencies appear in only one work, but in fact they are also present in one of the two "Virgin of the Rocks" paintings he made (the one made from 1483-1486 and is now at the Louvre), which had been the subject of a long-running legal dispute between Leonardo and the monastery that commissioned the work. Another work that displays the same kind of suspiciously heretical ideas is his "Adoration of the Magi" (1481-1482).