Chris Berens

[commandax]

"The Departure" detail


Bouguereau "All Souls Day"

[commandax]

"Something's Up (Going Down)"


Bouguereau "The Two Bathers"

[ill]

Nice catch on those. They were a bit more subtle, especially the Departure one. Seems pretty obvious Chris likes Bouguereau!

[commandax]

Yeah, I guess so. Bouguereau's flesh tones are incomparable, and he could paint draping fabric like no one's business. He's kind of a hero of Ryden's, too. Ryden ranted a bit about the general disregard for Bouguereau's work in the art world to the LA Weekly last year:

Ryden may be wary of discussing his own position in the art world, but he’s animated on the subject of William-Adolphe Bouguereau, the 19th-century French painter.

“Do you know Bouguereau?” he asks. “He’s one of the most hated artists ever. He’s also one of the most skilled artists ever. He paints flesh better than any artist, I feel. I don’t think his paintings are the best paintings ever. His content is peasant girls, beautiful peasant girls, and it offends so many people, so many people just hate him with a passion — but they’re painted so well. Especially for an artist, to look at just that application of paint mimicking flesh — it’s just mind-boggling, how amazing it is. People now want to know how to do that, they can appreciate it.”

The more he talks, describing a debate the Getty organized on the subject of Bouguereau last summer, the more personal his account begins to sound.

“He was hated for being very successful in his time,” he says. “It’s very respected to be insane like Van Gogh and never sell a painting — that’s a respectable way to be an artist. But to actually be successful with it and make good money is a sin.”

www.markryden.com/press/laweekly0307.html

[/size]

[devours]

Wanted to thank Commandax for bring Chris Berens to my attention a few months ago, thanks to her insightful blog. Very happy for your news, regarding his next book. His art is beyond spectacular, and Roq put on a beautiful show.

[commandax]

Wanted to thank Commandax for bring Chris Berens to my attention a few months ago, thanks to her insightful blog. Very happy for your news, regarding his next book. His art is beyond spectacular, and Roq put on a beautiful show.

Thank you! I really appreciate all the support my blog has gotten from Artchival folks. When you're writing something, it really helps to know that someone will probably read it. ;D

[marcusslo]

know when the book comes out?

[lowpro]

Thanks for pointing these parallels, or whatever you want to call them, out. It's certainly interesting and the resemblance is striking. Quality interview fodder for when that stone gets turned in the next couple weeks.

[commandax]

know when the book comes out?

The book of miniature paintings (Ninety-nine) is out now, only available from Roq la Rue and Jaski Gallery. Roq also has 2239, which covers all the work he's done before this show, and is definitely worth getting a copy of while it lasts... only 1000 were printed.

[devours]

Great news, that 'The Kiss' will be made into a print by Jaski. This painting was of an extremely private and personal importance to Chris, (as Low stated), and I think it is wonderful that it will be the next available print in the New Year. It is beautiful and moving, cannot wait!

[roqlarue]

Both Jaski Gallery and Roq La Rue will be selling The Kiss prints so hit me up if you want one!
-Kirsten

[commandax]

"The Fool on the Hill"


Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres – "Louis-François Bertin," 1832

[lowpro]

jeez...This is getting a little ridiculous.

Are any of his more figurative works, as it seems apparent that his nature/animal focused pieces are more authentic in origin, not derived from or reinterpretations of - to varying degrees of course - some classical work of art?

I'm not implying that it's necessarily a negative, per se, as the jury is still out on how I personally feel about it. Though I will admit, while I didn't know how exactly to feel about it initially, the more and more examples being brought to light are troubling me a bit more. Artistic inspiration is often a heated enough topic of discussion as is. But direct referencing of characters, in their exact same poses, of previously painting works is a whole other ball of wax. It can most definitely be interpreting in a positive light as clever form of homage and as a paying of respects to the artists near and dear to Chris' heart. It could, however, also be perceived as some distorted form of reproduction...or something along those lines.

How do others feel about this direct figurative referencing?

In no way does it detract from my love of Chris' work.....I don't think at least. It has just definitely caught me by surprise, with the piling up of examples only aggravating that feeling, and I'm going to have to think on it.

[commandax]

It's an interesting subject. Here are a few thoughts I've had on the matter.

The vast majority of figurative painters use live models or photo references... and since Chris is for the most part painting period characters, it would be a little difficult to get authentic period costumes and physical types to play these parts. Generally what Chris is taking from the earlier work is the posture and apparel. His characters wear garments and drapery that don't even exist today, and which no modern person knows how to wear authentically even if they did. I suspect he uses photo references when painting some of the animals as well... most artists would.

The paintings he is referencing are some of the most classical, academic paintings of their era. In fact, they are by artists who have been held in general disregard or even disdain for 100 years because their adherence to realism offended the avant-garde tastes of the 20th century. Perhaps the very transmogrification of these highly traditional images into this distorted, surrealistic universe could be viewed as an act of rebellion. Nothing of the original intent or purpose of the source work survives... and one could argue that the source work derives new life from its reinterpretation. Would any of us have been at all interested in poring through the work of Bouguereau or Ingres with great attention otherwise?

And this is neither here nor there, but all of these works are long since in the public domain.

I'm still pondering the subject, but that's what I've come up with so far.

[sleepboy]

I don't have any problem with it as long as the painter is dead and as long as it looks different. I'm even less bothered if it is a photo. Many many if not all artists use photo refs or other sources of inspiration at some point.

Also I think with Berens, his whole point is to reinterpret classical paintings and add animals, distortion etc right? Not sure.... Don't think he's trying to hide it. Kinda hard when you are using famous paintings.

[commandax]

"The Soft Parade"


Ingres – "Mademoiselle Caroline Riviere," 1805


"The Chase"


Ingres – "François Marius Granet," 1807

[lowpro]

Dec 27, 2008 19:10:32 GMT -8 commandax said:

It's an interesting subject. Here are a few thoughts I've had on the matter.

The vast majority of figurative painters use live models or photo references... and since Chris is for the most part painting period characters, it would be a little difficult to get authentic period costumes and physical types to play these parts. Generally what Chris is taking from the earlier work is the posture and apparel. His characters wear garments and drapery that don't even exist today, and which no modern person knows how to wear authentically even if they did. I suspect he uses photo references when painting some of the animals as well... most artists would.

The paintings he is referencing are some of the most classical, academic paintings of their era. In fact, they are by artists who have been held in general disregard or even disdain for 100 years because their adherence to realism offended the avant-garde tastes of the 20th century. Perhaps the very transmogrification of these highly traditional images into this distorted, surrealistic universe could be viewed as an act of rebellion. Nothing of the original intent or purpose of the source work survives... and one could argue that the source work derives new life from its reinterpretation. Would any of us have been at all interested in poring through the work of Bouguereau or Ingres with great attention otherwise?

And this is neither here nor there, but all of these works are long since in the public domain.

I'm still pondering the subject, but that's what I've come up with so far.

Damn. You have been pondering the matter for a while. Just now have I begun to truly think on my feelings about it, as the initial example or two didn't really cause much of a reaction for me. But those seem to be fair enough - and quite scholarly - speculations on his motivations. Bravo. You sound so smart.

Like I said, I don't think it diminishes my love for Chris beautiful work. I mean, I didn't have much interest in these artists prior and I wouldn't say his reinterpretations of their work has increased that interest in anyway. I wouldn't hang any of the original source paintings on my walls, whereas I love just about every one of his tweaked out remixes. I just wonder if it hinders my previously held notions of his work being so highly original and innovative...which I'll have to think on further. Certainly, both accolades still hold true from a technical and conceptual standpoint. But perhaps from a compositional perspective, with the figurative focal points often being so exactly repainted, it might. Really not sure.

And it's funny that you made the point that his animals and such are undoubtedly based off of photo references too, as I was about to say he probably has been a long time subscriber to National Geographic...which has had a many classic polar bear issues. Ha. Hell, another of my favorite artists, Josh Keyes, uses direct photo references. There were a few images chronicling his last show of him utilizing some photos he took of mailboxes and other Seattle landmarks as a guide for his paintings. I'm sure the bulk of his animal poses are take more or less directly out of books, magazines, or other photographs too. I recall recently spotting an image of Audrey Kawasaki working on one of her pieces for The Drawing Room show, where she had what looked like a tracing book of a bunch of different anatomical hearts opened, one of which was used verbatim in a painting. Interestingly, when I first saw both of these images, I scratched my head a little. But I suppose when you're achieving such exact, crisp detail, some form of reference is essential and few artists are exempt. But it's certainly a valid observation, and relates perfectly to Chris' utilization of classic paintings. I suppose for whatever reason, which I'm unsure I can really articulate at the moment, I feel a photographic reference - especially if taken yourself - is a bit different that mirroring a character in someone other artist's painting. Again, not sure though.

[marcusslo]

Dec 26, 2008 16:47:40 GMT -8 roqlarue said:

Both Jaski Gallery and Roq La Rue will be selling The Kiss prints so hit me up if you want one!
-Kirsten

awesome. i love kiss

[origo]

Inspiration is a must for artists but this is guy is a pure copycat, sure Berens can paint but this is simply ripping of.

[commandax]

Also I think with Berens, his whole point is to reinterpret classical paintings and add animals, distortion etc right? Not sure.... Don't think he's trying to hide it. Kinda hard when you are using famous paintings.

I think you have a good point. Especially in Europe, where these important historical paintings are probably much more familiar to the average art connoisseur, I'm sure the correlation between Chris' work and this source material hasn't gone unnoticed.

Interestingly, when I was writing the introduction to the little Ninety-nine book, Chris asked me to talk more about how "On a Midnight Voyage" was inspired by Paul Delaroche's "The Young Martyr." I had actually dropped all mention of it, feeling it was irrelevant to the work in that particular book, and was asked me to put it back in and expand on it. So he's certainly not trying to hide it.

I suppose for whatever reason, which I'm unsure I can really articulate at the moment, I feel a photographic reference - especially if taken yourself - is a bit different that mirroring a character in someone other artist's painting.

This is of course a sensitive subject. I appreciate the civility of our discussion of this so far, and I know we both love Chris' work, which I believe transcends these notions of plagiarism that are lurking around the corners of this conversation.

I probably don't need to make the point that it would be difficult to find many photographic references for costume that was worn before the camera was invented.

On a side note, I've been thinking about the use of the word "character" in referring to the people in these highly traditional paintings by Bouguereau, Ingres, Delaroche, etc. Many of these paintings are in reality commissioned portraits by some of the most realistic painters of their day – in fact, they could be considered the 19th century equivalent of the studio photograph – and their subjects are not exactly "characters" in the sense we would use it today... to describe a figure in an imaginary narrative.

The paintings in a more mythological vein depict characters, I suppose... but not ones conceived in the artist's imagination. (Imagine if every artist who painted a character inspired by Tenniel's drawings in Alice in Wonderland were considered a copycat.) The religious and mythological figures these painters depicted originated long before in someone else's imagination and had been painted countless times before by other artists.

I think that to further develop this conversation, it might be worth thinking a bit about the work of the universally revered outsider artist Henry Darger. www.hammergallery.com/Artists/darger/Darger.htm

Still pondering... just thought I'd drop those thoughts here while they were fresh in my mind.

[Mount Franklin]

Isn't he merely breathing new life into stuffy old portraits. The subjects of which get to travel through his somewhat surreal vision... and what a fun trip that would be. In my opinion, this is more than intentional. He has left too many clues. With someone of his skill it would have been far easier to concern himself less with the details such as reproducing the folds in fabric.

[anabagayan]

The way I see it, he mentioned that he learned to paint by copying the masters, whereas some of us learned to paint in a school with live nude and costumed models. I feel like he is paying homage to these historical paintings and showing us a part of his history openly and with passion considering how large this series is. I think he undoubtedly can paint anything he wants and he is interpreting these characters in a completely new style and technique. I almost would not have recognized some of the figures if they weren't compared side by side.

[greenhorn1]

are there any prints available other than the ones on the jaski website? I see the kiss is being made into a print but that one doesn't do a lot for me. Is there any word on if any other pieces from the roq la rue show will be made into prints?

[Bytor]

I watched a video on Chris and how he does this work and what is interesting to me is that the video states that his work isn't planned out before hand and that it is very "organic" in the way it is developed, but if most of his work is direct figurative referencing then the painting has been kinda spelled out for him before hand. But , I love the technique Chris is using and it really is beautiful work. He seems to be very creative and I would love to see what he would create as a totally original expression of himself in the future.

[devours]

Jan 9, 2009 10:51:01 GMT -8 greenhorn1 said:

are there any prints available other than the ones on the jaski website? I see the kiss is being made into a print but that one doesn't do a lot for me. Is there any word on if any other pieces from the roq la rue show will be made into prints?

No other works from his Roq show will be made into prints. Only 'The Kiss' which is due at the end of Feb.