Emile Munier was born in Paris on June 2, 1840 and lived with his family at 66 rue des Foss

Mike,

At the beginning of my not so illustrious pursuit of the portrait I turned up my nose at the idea of painting children.

I have come to discover that these little people are far more interesting and challenging to do justice. In addition I have found that to create a happy client I must capture the identity of the child in the Parent's mind and not necessarily just a likeness.

The simple story conveyed by and for the third painting is illustrious of just how my pride causes me to overlook the beauty of a thing.

Thank you for the post.

John,

Still, others would call these trite or sentimental. Usually people in the trade, people that look at paintings all day long. I try and see a painting on my wall apart from the weight of those that know so much. At the end of the day we all have to figure it out for ourselves.

Here are a few more from Emile Munier, always with the hands and feet:

1- The Broken Vas 36x24
2- La Lettre
3- Distracting the baby 20x15

And finally, one of our recent arrivals to Florida. Probably just arrived from Minnesota looking for a condo - something in oak.

This first image is from Eugene de Blaas and is interesting because of the placement of the signature. Sometimes it gets to be a challenge as to where to place your mark but on this composition there seems to be other more traditional opportunities. I am of the opinion that the placement of the signature can often act as an integral part of the composition. I don't suggest that this placement is wrong, it's just different.

And another interesting composition from Alphonse Mucha.

1- Portrait of a lady, Pencil-WC-Gouache
2- The Artist , Oil on canvas board, 1920

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_thinking

http://www.cheathouse.com/essay/essa...ssay_id=109932

http://www.monash.edu.au/lls/llonlin...riting/1.1.xml

I like Munier's work, because he not only captures the iamge of children well, but also creates a narrative around what these kids might be doing.

SB, great points are made at that site.

Buried back on page seven of this voluminous thread is a quote by a Mr. Damon Denys.

His quote reads:

"If the visual elements do not attempt to describe a theme, the painting cannot be said to possess a composition at all. In such cases, the painter has only produced an arrangement of visual elements. He is a painter, but he is not an artist."

Based on the volume of Myspace entries that yuz guys are producing I can only conclude that you are bored out of your minds. So, maybe we can exercise our brains a little more on this matter of compositon.

I offer the following images for your consideration.

If you accept Mr. Denys's "theme" premise you could argue that my first image is no composition at all. I'm not sure I accept the premise. Although, if you ask me what theme the image is trying to convey I'm not sure I could answer the question. The opposing view might be: I don't have to answer that question, you're not the boss of me. A theme I've heard from the random child on occasion.

If you can pull yourself away from your Myspace (I was not accepted at Myspace, but instead was juried into Assface - a slightly smaller community) maybe you could ponder the following:

1. What is the theme of the second image? If it is enough to call it "lady in a white dress," then why can't it be enough that the theme of the first image is "boots on the ground pointing East?"

2. What would be the theme of the third image by Winslow Homer?

3. Would you consider the first image to be well composed, without regard to "theme?"

Thanks for sharing!
 

I think that Norman Rockwell set an excellent examle for " art ...to be easily accessible to the people".

Mike--

All I can say is "bloody critics!"

As if producing an "arrangement of visual elements" weren't enough to occupy one well into old age. To answer your question, yes the first one is a well-composed piece. Brings to mind Jamie Wyeth's boot-trampled weed, and I don't think many people are debating whether that painting is art or not.

I would submit that the insistence on a "theme" is a literary requirement/ conceit that comes from the mind of a wordsmith, not a visual artist, so isn't it a little presumptuous to assume that wordsmithing makes one an arbiter of who is or isn't an artist?

I'm not saying that one has to be an artist to be a critic, but a good critic at least has a minimum understanding of process. I don't know many visual artists that make up the story first and then a painting to go with it, though some occasionally do. (Illustrator/ authors, but that's another discussion.)

And wouldn't Denys' requirement of "theme" relegate all art that he estimates as good to "mere illustration"--a term that most art critics have made an instant stamp of inferiority? Well, which is it guys? ("Mere illustration" being another phrase that sets my teeth grinding.)

Humor and Composition
 

[QUOTE=Mike McCarty]


Based on the volume of Myspace entries that yuz guys are producing I can only conclude that you are bored out of your minds. So, maybe we can exercise our brains a little more on this matter of compositon.
t have to answer that question, you're not the boss of me. A theme I've heard from the random child on occasion.

If you can pull yourself away from your Myspace (I was not accepted at Myspace, but instead was juried into Assface - a slightly smaller community) maybe you could ponder the following:
_____
Mike, I laughed so hard at your take on Myspace that I forgot to think about the subject! Thanks for the interjection of your very special sense of humor. I've missed the many valuable learning experiences provided by this forum before the popularity of Myspace. When I stop laughing, :D I'll be able to think about a thread several eons ago, I just might have started. Composition is one heck of an important subject.