 |
|
Madonna con
Bambino Benedicente or, Madonna del Pollice by Giovanni Bellini in 1460-1464 |
This is my favourite picture in the world. Available to view at the Accademia Gallery in Venice. Top quality workmanship with delightful Infant Jesus and engaging air of pensive melancholy shown by Mary. Highly conducive to holy contemplation.
And here is one by D Hockney called Mr and Mrs Clark and their cat Percy (painted in 1970-1971; now at Tate Britain Gallery). The cat wasn't even called Percy - its name was Blanche though speaking as one whose cat is called Blackie I can't really complain about a white cat called Blanche. However, the name Percy is the best thing about this painting in my opinion. I nearly called our son Percy but decided he might never forgive me so there was a fontside rethink. Now he is 15 and he regularly berates me for not calling him Percy as he would have liked it. He is lucky not to be still called G-AHLK actually so he should count his blessings.
Here is what I object to about this painting:
1) General style. It is like one of the illustrations they used to have in Ladybird books - perfectly adequate in its way, but hardly great art. In fact the colours are rather less subtle than one would hope to find in a Ladybird book. The treatment is crude and undetailed.
 |
| See what I mean? Far better. |
2) Composition. Vastly improved if a live figure stands in front of the painting.
I can not understand why the telephone or the yellow book have been included. They are not things of beauty and their significance escapes me.
I can not understand why the telephone or the yellow book have been included. They are not things of beauty and their significance escapes me.
3) Figures: Has Mr Clark a club foot? It appears so. (His left foot). [One presumes his right foot looks peculiar because half of it is buried in the decadent thick carpet. It could be a homage to the fact that Bellini's Jesus' right foot seems only to have 4 toes, but I doubt it.] Also he might have had the good manners to sit up straight for the portrait. It is unconventional anyway for a gentleman to be sitting down if there are ladies present who have not got a seat and this is a possible explanation for the peevish mood in which Mrs Clark is here depicted. Alternatively she may be looking cross because even though Mr Clark is a fashion designer (I looked it up) they have put her in an old sack for the occasion.
4) Other annoying things: Why is the telephone on the floor? What is that weird thing beside it? Why aren't either of these plugged in? The shadow under the chair does not look right. That picture hanging on the wall on the left is (I looked this up too) an etching by D Hockney so one can only admire the nerve of the artist in displaying such self-aggrandisement. The lilies are OK but I must point out that in real life people do not advisedly use narrow vases with high centres of gravity on low tables. That will certainly be knocked over when the cat gets off the bloke's knee.
Verdict: I'll have the Bellini. Julia can have the Percy one.
The Bellini painting is beautiful and I agree with your estimation of his wonderful technique. His intention, of course, was to create the beautiful, as an expression of the divine nature, and the educative but not necessarily an object which had a transcendent purpose. For this you should look to Byzantine ikons. Bellini's painting reminds this viewer, at least, of "Wacko Jacko"'s dangling of - was it 'Paris' or 'Princess'? over a balcony, which, you remember, occasioned a global intake of breath. Mary looks to me as though suffering from post-natal depression and has been keeping the infant awake long past his bedtime. He's obviously not happy and is trying to hail a cab. There is no doubt in my mind that were they alive today an army of social workers would be knocking at the door in no time.
ReplyDeleteHockney had a quite different purpose. Not for him the creation of the beautiful. He intends us to read his painting, as Bellini intended his to be read, though Hockney's is replete with more symbolism. The symbols of purity, death, sensuality and infidelity in the painting are deliberate and the couple are separate and cold - a comment by Hockney on the couple's reprehensible, drug indulged and spoilt life.
I now realise the puzzling reference to 'Julia' is your pervious commentary may be connected in some way with this painting. Mr Clark, were he able to comment, would have heartily agreed with your linking of the bovine to his (later ex) wife. If so it's clear whose side you are on, though in my opinion Mr and Mrs Clark are equally ghastly.
Good I am glad you find Mr and Mrs Clark ghastly. To say 'Do it to Julia' is to indicate that what one is suffering can no longer be borne and that one would prefer someone else - even one's own beloved see 1984 by G Orwell - to take on the suffering instead. By extension, you can indicate that you find something exruciating by saying that you wish it on Julia. Thus not only is she doomed to suffer the indignity of being serenaded by a man in a cow suit, but now she has got to hang the picture of Mr and Mrs Clark on her wall as well. Poor Julia. She has a lot to put up with.
DeleteThanks to your erudition following my query I now see another layer of meaning in D Hockney's masterpiece (which, I dare say, is not helped by your addition of the girl about to walk into the table). The morally collapsed figure in the chair is Hockney's version of the 'rat' in Orwell's novel '1984', which the artist suggests not only by the morally unblemished 'white' cat under whose weight Mr Clark slouches but his rat like and distinctly shifty expression.
DeleteHad Mr Hockney recently suffered a rejection by Mr Clark I wonder? Biographers please note.
Mr and Mrs Clark are not worthy of comparison beside the Holy Infant and Mother that is true, but are nevertheless a salutary warning to anyone tempted by sin. Fr O'Hanrahan would do well to place a copy in his 'corner'.
Fr O'Hanrahan writes: Blessings upon you, my child. You are right not to mention the fingers of the virgin's right hand looking a bit wobbly. We don't want to unsettle the faithful now, do we? But that fellow in the er... Hockney - you could mention that he was (shall we say) indelicate in his behaviour? Not only did he not go to church but he was known to have indulged in certain 'activities' which doubtless affected the shape of his feet. I won't be around when you're cleaning the church this week as I have a big parish, but please leave the cake in the sual place. I hope to see you (D.V.) at mass as usual. And now I'm away to the corner.
ReplyDeleteO Father. Thank you for the message. About Our Lady's fingers, have you not heard of the Renaissance Fifth Finger - "A stylistic trait, the hallmark of this period, is that the fingers are fine and long, the middle and fourth finger close together and the little finger portrayed with a crooked deformity (clinodactyly). These features are prominent in art works of the school of Rogier van der Weyden in Flanders and of Sandro Botticello in Italy. These features can add grace and delicacy."
DeleteMrs Caydogorn is doing your cake this week as I too must away to the corner.
It is unkind to speak ill of the dead. Mr. Clark (Ossie) was stabbed to death at the age of 54 by his 28 year old former Italian lover Diego Cogolato.
ReplyDeleteIsn't it rather more unkind to stab someone to death? I'm sorry if my comment concerning Mr Clark's character wounded you in any way - from the familiar use of his name 'Ossie' I assume you were once on friendly terms? Perhaps you still harbour commendably loyal, though in my opinion misplaced, feelings for him? If so, I recommend a chat with Fr O'Hanrahan.
ReplyDeleteI've just noticed a disembodied hand holding a cigarette resting on Hockney's male figure's upper arm. What can this mean?
ReplyDelete