Featured New game: Yea or Nay?

This portrait by Pougialis reminds me of some of the early work of Federico Castellon. I took a class once in which I did a little research on Castellon, and a little analysis of the following work that is usually called "Memories." I think there are some similarities in the faces, at least.

http://americanart.si.edu/collections/search/artwork/?id=3842

Since their life spans overlapped, I now wonder whether they ever knew or influenced each other. Pougialis was born about 20 years earlier, and died about 14 years later than Castellon.

 

I see that Pougialis taught at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago in the late 1930s-early 1940s. I know that Castellon had works exhibited at the Museum of the Art Institute of Chicago during that same time frame. Otherwise, I haven't seen a connection yet. -- Oh, well, off to other tasks for now!

 

It does and I think if you look at some other of Pougialis' portraits you will see more similarities. Many of his portraits are "softer" than the one I posted. I chose it to post due to the similarity to Roman's.

These artists did not work in a vacuum. The fact that all three had connections to the Art Institute is telling.

 

Pair #6
Both are oil on board

Painting A: 16" x 20"
There is some glare on this so I have posted two pictures.




Painting B: approx. 9" x 12"

 

Innnnnteresting!

Painting A is powerful... expanding outwards... pushing limits at the expense of the land and culture... kind of an industrial revolution taking over the countryside. It could be anywhere in the world, but it gives me an eastern European east or northwards vibe. It makes me feel like singing the Volga Boat Song... the YO-HEAVE-HO one. I enjoy urban blight and industrial devastation depictions. They can be rendered such that they are so ugly that they are beautiful... to me. I might actually buy this one and give it to somebody who has a fabulous loft downtown.

Painting B. Same theme, but less courageously done. Ugly pollution rendered not-so-much beautiful as boring. Different artist, I betcha. I would pass it up.

I wouldn't hang them together... painting A would beat painting B up, all day long. Painting A is a bully, a big dirty, overbearing industrial bully... painting B is a washed out version. I think that's the meanest thing I have said YET about a painting. Painting A made me say it!

Another good pair, Brad!

 

Hi Brad,
Growing up in the 40s/50s in Pittsburgh. I see the steel mills lighting up the night with blast furnaces and such. It brings back horrible thoughts like driving in the city at noon with your headlights on. I have such horrible as well as wonderful thoughts when I look at painting A. To me I find nothing of value or art in painting B.
greg

 

I like the drama of Painting A and the tension between the bright light of the blast furnace behind the brooding darkness of the buildings in shadow. Coincidentally, I live within 2 blocks of a steel recycling plant, built on the site of a Youngstown Steel facility. My house was one of those built in the neighborhood to provide housing for the workers and managers about 100 years ago, mine in 1916. (Happy 100th Birthday!) Of course it has been ages since there was a functioning blast furnace over there (the recycling uses electricity to melt the incoming scrap), but the buildings look a lot like the ones in the painting.

Painting B is just strange - old barns? and ranch house in a pastoral setting with a huge industrial complex behind them? If it were more carefully painted it might make a statement, but I see it as a bit sloppy (what is that dark brown slash sticking up on the right side of the house, for instance.) Maybe it's supposed to be "impressionist?" In any event, I'm not a fan.

 

Brad, are the images of A showing the whole painting? For some reason I feel like I'm viewing a cropped image.

I think A is full of light and life. Along the same lines as Gila, I think it would be perfect for a loft apartment. Or any large expanse of wall space in the right environment. What the painting is lacking in detail it makes up for in the rendering of light.

I like B because it reminds me of when I lived in Galveston, my all-time favorite place. It is a quiet, lazy painting, but Galveston was like that for me, too, combining industrial sites and a sense of summertime leisure. Although it's different than any artwork I have hanging, I could see finding a place for it in my home. I'd love to see it in a frame that gives a sense of depth, as though looking through a window. I agree that it's not the most skilled of paintings, though.

 

Brad - I meant to ask while I was making my comments - which of the 2 pictures of Painting A looks closest to the reality of it in person?

 

Of the two pictures of A, the first is most life-like. There is some glare to the right side so I provided the second which has less glare but is washed out in the sky.

Neither painting is cropped significantly. Painting A was shot at a bit of an angle to avoid glare so there is some distortion. The buildings at the outer edges appear vertical rather than angled as they do in the picture.

 

Thanks, Brad.

 

Brad, I didn’t comment on the last set. Felt I had nothing to add.

For this pair I will, only because you may want reaction from one with no formal training or strong experience in art. What might catch the eye of that type and perhaps prompt a sale.

A - actually hit me hard. Really hard. My head jerked back a few inches. And that was a 7 x 10. What would twice the size have done? Very strong. One immediate thought was, “That artist is talented and certainly has the ability to grab and hold your attention.”

Overall, I admire the talent. Would I want it on display in my home? No thank you. It does not fit. It’s TOO strong, would dominate any room. Would I buy it for someone else. Love to, but really no one I can think of.
The second copy of A. – too bright. The darker #1 more “ominous.”
FYI, if helpful. I have never seen such a structure(s) in real life.

Scroll down to B. UH! NAH! Dull, not as talented. Pale pastel, unrealistic coloring. IF A had not preceded it, I may have had a different reaction.

Then I scrolled down to Gila’s opinion. She said what I would have if had her talent. Other posts also added to my education.

Hope that is useful to you.

 

Not addressing 5th pair yet....just a late thank you for this thread! Yay!!! We get to go back to "Art Appreciation" class for a while!!!! Fun stuff!!!!

 

5th PAIR: Well now, I LIKE THIS SIDE of painting A SO much better!!!! The colors, the flowing lines, the spacing, balance......to me....VERY nice!!!! OTHER SIDE OF "A" is the winner here for me!!!!

 

Fig.....THAT is what I meant to say.....NOT quite sure it came across that way!!!!!

 

This is OT to the current pair but needed to post this for Gila .......

How about this one?

 

Oh, Brad... that's the one.
Ahhhhh, the peonized, over-worked, marginalized, oppressed victims of the Establishment...
... like mural painters.
YO HEAVE HO!!!!!!!
Thanks!

 

Yes, very much in the tradition of painting the romanticized proletariat. This is a painting I bought from Canada but the seller had said it had been imported from Europe at some point. It had an export stamp that I could never decipher. The artists name was Puskass which I found was Hungarian. Hungary is land-locked so I was thinking maybe Polish or other Eastern block country. This painting was over 5 ft. long and I had a hard time selling it. Finally made about $100.00 profit on it after several years of holding it.

 

I forgot to add that I like it a lot... 5 ft!!!!!! That's a lot of 'romanticized proletariat'... I know a social worker with an awesome loft near Lake Erie. She would have loved it.

 

I sold it on ebay and the buyer was happy with it. However, she did mention that she wasn't aware that it was quite that big!