Comments on: “A Few Days With Wyeth” by Matthew Ballou

By: Short Essay About Andrew Wyeth

Short Essay About Andrew Wyeth — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 02:31:00 +0000

[…] and is about the trip I made out to Philadelphia for the Wyeth retrospective there in 2006. Read the piece at Neoteric and let me know if I got too sentimental or […]

By: Matt Ballou

Matt Ballou — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 03:41:27 +0000

Victoria,

After writing this piece I was speaking with a fellow painter who spent childhood time in the Brandywine Valley area – he also mentioned the same reality that you do above: that Wyeth was reacting to the sort of chromatic environments in which he was immersed. This seems to me to be exactly what happens to almost any sort of artist when they live in a specific location and feel an affection toward or sympathetic synergy with the place (Diebenkorn is cited as a famous example of this truth).

By: Victoria Webb

Victoria Webb — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 02:39:53 +0000

The fact that Hickey said his work was ‘dead in person’ actually reflects more on Hickey’s inability to ’see’ painting. There’s nothing bourgeois about Wyeth’s work and how the hell can that word describe the subject matter? He’s painting farmers for god’s sake.
Hickey’s role in the art world just dropped several notches for me, at least.

The other great thing about Wyeth’s work that you touched on in this review is the way he handled light. The Brandywine Valley in fall and winter does look camouflaged and brown, as any of us who live here can vouch for. Wyeth captured the low tonal values and the cool light perfectly, but makes it all interesting and often exciting. I never much liked his work before I saw it ‘live’.

But I’ll leave Currin behind. Anatomy is the issue there.

By: Norbert Marszalek

Norbert Marszalek — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 00:38:31 +0000

“Wyeth was an anti-modern painter,” Mr. Storr said. “He did paintings that never changed, in a style that never changed. His image is one of stasis in a world that changed dramatically around him, and for my money that is a conservative position. It is in many ways a futile exercise, but he did it with great energy and conviction.”

This could also describe Edward Hopper plus I’m sure a bunch of other revered artists. It always perplexed me why Hopper’s “Nighthawks” is considered a masterpiece while the consensus is still out concerning Wyeth’s “Christina’s World”. Mind you, I love both Hopper and Wyeth.

Matt you are making me love Wyeth even more with your “abstraction” comments. I never thought of his compositions, etc in that context before. Thank you.

Next in line is Norman Rockwell. The art world loves to beat him up but I do believe he is getting more attention nowadays. Also, there are some critics who bash John Currin. I don’t really get that one either…the guy can paint!

By: Bob Stanley

Bob Stanley — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 02:37:08 +0000

I’ll sail on the boat that “venture[s] to say that Wyeth was one of the absolute best abstract painters of the last 100 years.”

And Hickey? Never been anything BUT “dead as a bored,” to riff on his words about Wyeth.