“Have you ever seen blood in the moonlight, Will? It appears quite black.”
This is by far one of the strangest and most interesting paintings we’ve ever exhibited. It is also the first painting I’ve included two photos of. The truth is that these photos just don’t do this painting justice: to my eye, at first this painting looked almost completely black. But when I had a look at the first photo I took, it didn’t even seem like the same painting: in the photo, the areas where the glossy paint is exceptionally thick reflect the light in a way that makes the painting seem brighter than it actually is. But even the sky, which is not exactly thick with paint, seemed darker in person. What’s going on here? The second photo is closer to what this thing looks like in real life, but even that doesn’t convey how weirdly dark it is. So. Long story short: this painting is, in its own way, very good, very strange, and I now absolutely regret not having bought it. For $4.99!!! No idea where I would have put it, but I regret not buying it.
Something about this feels very real to me. Too bad the execution is so ugh. The mountainous cliffy bits are nondescript and blobby. The trees are nice: some years my family had Christmas trees that looked very much like these. Of course, Christmas trees back then were more diverse and in some respects weirder looking than they are nowadays. Anyway. The depth/distance bit is nicely done as well. The froth and white water isn’t so great, but you can tell what’s going on with it at least. We’ve got the same kind of rather awful sky that I’ve seen so many times before. What is it with these ongoing bad skies?!? One wouldn’t think painting a sky would be so difficult, right? WRONG! My skies suck too! But they’re generally better than this one. Anyway, there are a few things to like here. Keep at it, MD!
Postscript: I thought this felt “real” but I finally figured it out: it’s just “familiar”: check out October 27th…
You may be asking yourself “What are we looking at?” Your guess is as good as mine.
Technically proficient: it looks exactly like what it’s supposed to be, right? But dig: paradoxically, I’m gonna call a painting of a tree with purple leaves unimaginative. Here we’ve got gray, black and purple. Sure, it’s a night painting. But come on! Gaze at this thing for too long while thinking intently about it and you will find that some of your Joi de Vivre has been dissipated. That’s the opposite of what Art is supposed to do. Someone drive a stake through this thing quick. Damn.
Honestly I don’t know what this is but as I was trying to come up with a clever name for it I realized it looks a bit like a quarter nickel dime and penny.
Not my cup of tea: too modern for my taste and far too bland color-wise but eh: to each his (or her) own.
If this was done free hand, the artist made far better circles than I ever could have. I have shaky hands.
Anyway, it’s been a nice Centennial. Here’s looking forward to our Bicentennial. Onward and upward! I’ll randomly insert one of my own misconceived, ill-advised paintings sometime in the next year and we’ll see if anyone can figure out which one it is.
By the way: I painted a tree (three actually) last night that didn’t make me want to kick the legs out from under my easel and throw my paints down an elevator shaft. Progress!
(Value Village Art Gallery Favorite)
As mentioned earlier, this is the second painting in the same day that is…so good…that I wondered if it wasn’t from Wayfair dot com, or from some Chinese prisoner-staffed painting factory. But dig the signature: what Wayfair painting would have a signature that looks like the logo for Toys R Us? Unless this is the world’s best “paint by numbers” kit, it has 100% got to be what it seems to be: a really nice painting by a legit amateur human being person-type artist guy. BAteMAN: we salute you!
Two in a row by the same artist I think. The trees are better than the background. That’s about the only negative I can come up with. And I feel like a jerk for having even said that, since this calmly quiet and mellow landscape is leagues better than most of the stuff I’m used to exhibiting here. I’m very grateful to finish up 2023 with a few paintings that don’t look like they were done by box-wine-drunk soccer moms at an Applebee’s Paint Night.
PS sorry for the tilt: I was trying to avoid the ceiling fluorescent light glare on the glass.
Anyway, yet again there’s nothing to ridicule here: it’s a nice, painterly landscape, I’m guessing of the Bob Ross variety.
My trees continue to suck. I’m envious.
If that seems a little harsh, well, I don’t like birds. There: I’ve said it! My secret is out: I’m not a big fan of birds. I especially don’t like city birds. Filthy creatures with their little pitchfork feet. Ugh. So paint something else next time if you want me to be nicer. Try a mammal. Or a well-done landscape.
