Reynolds was a very impressive fellow. He was a good artist, and it's ok to be flashy in a post Baroque way. He was also dealing with aristocrat portraiture which required a degree of exaggerated flamboyance. He's properly recognized as an expert in painting material stuff and composition, I mean fabrics, gesture, light. But he was no investigator of the human soul. He shed no spiritual blood and exposed no psychic pain. Happily, he knew his place in the scheme of genius, playing a minor role, and he made the most of it. I think Reynolds has been grossly misunderstood and denigrated as a director of the Royal Academy, suffering the wholesale denigration of all academic art in the early modernist era. In fact, his Discourses are models of wise and well-informed advice to young artists at the Academy. They are elaborated with nuance and taken altogether, advocate individuality, creative searching and rigorous study. Good enough still today.
WC --- Derek Allan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Re: 'Sir Joshua Reynolds, a flashy painter ...' > > Alas we disagree about Reynolds. For me he is one of > the best English > painters. I even prefer him to Gainsborough and > Turner. Certainly to > the Romneys etc. He is definitely in my 'canon'. > > (The sooner the word 'canon' is forgotten in > relation to art, the > better, in my view. It fosters a very short-sighted > view of art > history.) > > D > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 12:22 AM, William Conger > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Every artist works with a model in mind, however > vague > > or eclectic. The artist is always working for and > > against some model of what art can be. There's no > > such thing as a canon. That's the creation of art > > history and it has no life of its own, as it were, > but > > is animated solely by art historians doing their > work > > and competing with one another for what's in and > > what's out. > > > > Artistic death occurs when some supposed canon > becomes > > the measure of what an artistic success is. This > has > > been proven over and over in the course of > history. > > Sir Joshua Reynolds, a flashy painter and English > > Royal Academy director said it best: "He who > follows > > must necessarily stay behind." > > > > It was said that the most adventurous American > > frontier pioneers moved on when they heard the > sound > > of another man's axe. Similarly, for artists, as > > soon as the canon is defined, it's time to move > on. > > In pioneering days the preachers, teachers, and > > lawyers followed after the frontiersmen. Likewise > in > > art. For that reason I agree that art schools > should > > "preach and teach" some of the "traditional" > curricula > > and studio practices, the civilizing impulse and > > shaper of the art theory, but no one should equate > > those with the need for the serious artist to > > continually "break new ground" by moving on, and > on, > > and on still more, and excited by the freshness > and > > wildness of lawless discovery and free from > canonical > > cautions. > > > > WC > > > > > > > > -- > Derek Allan > http://www.home.netspeed.com.au/derek.allan/default.htm
