[Garth Herrick]

Scott Bartner and I had the good fortune to visit the National Portrait Gallery last July, and it seemed we reflected many feelings about the state of presidential portraiture there. There was quite a frenzy around Nelson Shank's portrait of William Jefferson Clinton. It was hard to even get a picture of it. It seems one painting you only luke-warmly like or absolutely hate. If one has mixed feelings, it seems to be with good reason.

This is one contemporary portrait which does have the sartorial splendor thrown in, but perhaps with a dash of triteness and superficiality (to me). The central most bothersome aspect of this painting is how it has all the compositional forces working in concert to emphasize the importance of Mr. Clinton's genital region! No really, take another look: we are talking dead center in the painting, with many other surrounding elements pointing right at it (the fingers, the tie, the newspaper, the fire box edge, the angularity of the pose gesture; all arrows). Yet there is an unmistakable deftness and wise mastery to the execution, as only Shanks can uniquely do (in Philadelphia, his Union League portraits are arguably the finest and most masterfully conceived and composed in their collection). It goes without saying, as a colorist, Nelson Shanks is very much in brilliant control of a full spectrum palette in his color development. But compositionally and content wise, I am led to question his intent with this presidential portrayal.

In these next three examples, it could be argued for comparable purposes that the epicenter of these canvases represent respectively their subjects hearts......

The portrait I think Scott and I universally liked the most was that by Anders Zorn, of Grover Cleveland. This chromatic and compositional tour-de-force was allegedly mainly painted with just Vermilion, Black, Yellow Ochre, and Flake White! At any rate, the painterly passages are truly the most lush and sumptious in their deftness and economy. What a masterful and well organized complexity! What does this success of a portrait say of this president?

Another portrait most worthy in my mind is the brilliantly edgy yet lush iconic image of George Bush Sr., by Ron Sherr. I sense a real window into his personality; both calm cool assurance, and shivering controversy! However time settles the record, this portrait will work.

There is a tight and dead-on pastel portrait of Reagan at his casual finest. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this one by Aaron Shickler? It is a dynamic and introspective look at an intensely individual personality perhaps facing his twilight. The stark simplicity works for me. Sure, this one was worked up from a photo reference, but with impeccable skill and experience.

Okay, here's the pictures: (Mind you, these are only hand-held shots in museum lighting, so I apologize for imperfections).

Garth