By: DieGoo

DieGoo — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 05:08:45 +0000

Hi Carole,i had to comment, becuase yes…the same thing happens to me all the time when i add people in my work. They usually turn into family members for me…funny but perhaps subconsciously we just ‘know’ their features, stance, gestures that make them uniquely them and that gets translated when we paint.Lovely painting!Sally

By: David Cohen

David Cohen — Sun, 17 Nov 2013 17:54:29 +0000

I don’t usually comment on articles I publish but rather than challenge Dr Carrier on his view of contemporary landscape painting in the editing stage it seems more useful to post his excellent and unusual point of view and take up the issue publicly. I love your point about nature seeming romantic and cities realist per se, regardless of approach. But what seems strangely limiting is the sense that post-symbolism landscape is somehow a rarity: we have had a century not only of Derain, Matisse, Soutine, de Kooning, et al. but we have in our present painting culture Anselm Kiefer, Per Kirkeby (about whom David Carrier wrote in these pages) and Leon Kossoff, and that’s just the Ks. If Amenoff LOOKS visionary, is it not because his landscape owes as much to Marsden Hartley and Charles Burchfield as it does to actually looking at and being in the landscape? Also, what about the unromantic contemporary landscape painters like Alex Katz, Lois Dodd, Sylvia Plimack-Mangold, Rackstraw Downes et al who take their urban eyes to unsentimentalized countryside? And what indeed of Katz’s night paintings of New York (and Yvonne Jacquette’s) that are not essentially different from their rural visions?

Comments on: Secular Exhilerations: Gregory Amenoff and Nature

By: DieGoo

By: David Cohen