Updates from April, 2011 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • instruktorx 23:21 on 05/04/2011 Permalink |

    borise, ja progut’o globus… 

    Hvala Juliji za podlogu 🙂

  • zokster 23:19 on 05/04/2011 Permalink |

    Dođi da ti krljnem jezik 

  • instruktorx 23:07 on 05/04/2011 Permalink |

    kašika je zlo-bavite se sportom! 

  • snezanacongradin 22:22 on 05/04/2011 Permalink |

    ko je zasluzan za urushavanje ugleda evropskih integracija srbije 

  • snezanacongradin 21:51 on 05/04/2011 Permalink |
    Tags: evopa   

    istrazivanje: da li ste za ulazak srbije u EU? 

  • julija 21:40 on 05/04/2011 Permalink |
    Tags: , mamin sin   

    bruno,mamin sin

  • snezanacongradin 21:40 on 05/04/2011 Permalink |

    u prolazu, opushteno… 

  • snezanacongradin 20:48 on 05/04/2011 Permalink |

    kad se zokster zaljubi 

  • zokster 20:43 on 05/04/2011 Permalink |

    Paula Rego was born in Lisbon on 26… 

    Paula Rego was born in Lisbon on 26 January 1935. She grew up in a republican and liberal family, linked to both English and French culture, and studied at St. Julian’s School in Carcavelos, spending her childhood and adolescence in Estoril. In the 1950s, her father encouraged her to pursue her artistic career away from the Portugal of Salazar’s dictatorship, and Paula Rego enrolled at the prestigious Slade School of Fine Art in London, aged just 17. She met several artists at the school, including her future husband, Victor Willing, whom she married in 1959 and with whom she would later have three children.
    (More …)

    • zokster 21:42 on 05/04/2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      LONDON—Though she was born and raised in Portugal, Paula Rego has earned a level of status as an enormously respected mainstay of the British figurative tradition. (She has been so embraced, in fact, that in 1990 she was named the first associate artist at London’s National Gallery.)

      For something like 40 years her work has pursued themes that are at once universal and highly personal: She has drawn her imagery from folk tales, fairy stories and the history of art, but she has also infused it with a darkness that is entirely her own. Her stylistic adventurousness has been unflagging, and whereas her first well-known pictures had a cartoon-like quality to them, she now seems to stand squarely in the tradition of large-scale historical painting.

      A book recently published by Phaidon (the third, fully revised and updated edition of John McEwan’s monograph on Rego), makes plain that, although Rego’s work has changed stylistically in terms of subject matter, her core set of subjects have remained intact.

      Like what you see? Sign up for ARTINFO’s daily newsletter to get the latest on the market, emerging artists, auctions, galleries, museums, and more.

      From her studio in London, the artist spoke to ArtInfo about her mission to reflect the darker aspects of life, and to give form to the unseeable.


      Paula, can we begin by talking about when your work first came to broad public attention in Britain, at the beginning of the 1980s? That must’ve a very interesting time to be a figurative painter.

      Yes, nowadays you can do a lot of different things, but then it was a question of what was in fashion, really. The studios in London were full of people doing huge abstract paintings. Earlier, when I was a student, it was alright to paint the figure, and then I did a lot of collages. They’re all figurative and they all tell stories. They’re quite political some of them. And none of that was at all popular until the fashion changed. And then it was again OK to do it.

      I remember that there was a lot of excitement about the return of figurative painting at that time.

      Yes [in 1980-81] there was a big show here in London at the Royal Academy called “A New Spirit in Painting.” They showed Philip Guston, who was a very courageous and wonderful artist who had been doing that for some time, and others like him who were suddenly admired. They had Schnabel and Clemente and all those artists that suddenly became known—at least to me.

      Did you feel a kinship with any of those artists?

      You mean, did I identify with those people? No, not much. It was lovely to see figures again, but I couldn’t see that many of those people were telling stories. I like illustration and I like telling stories. I’ve always like artists like Daumier, Goya, Hogarth, Winsor McCay. It’s a different kind of art. It often isn’t called art.

      In your work, you’ve used stories from fairy tales and opera libretti, but in recent years your subjects seem to be drawn from more current events. I’m thinking particularly of those rather harrowing pictures of women on beds.

      Well, they’re abortion pictures. It’s the only time I’ve actually done something for propaganda. Quite frankly there was nothing else I could do. I did them because in Portugal abortion is illegal. It’s always been illegal. But it’s easy to get an abortion. Everyone has them. It’s just hypocrisy. Even now, in 2006, people are arrested and put in jail [for having or performing an abortion]. Even the nurses who help them are put in jail. It must be the only country in Europe that’s like that.

      What finally convinced you to begin these works?

      I felt very strongly about the issue, and [in 1997] there was a referendum in Portugal and I thought they should vote “yes” [to legalize abortion], so I painted all these pictures and I showed them in Portugal—it was very courageous of the Calouste Gulbenkian Museum to show them—and people came along and looked at them. A lot of women looked at them with great seriousness and they knew what they were about, but most of the art critics were afraid and reviewed them as art: they commented on the process, how well drawn they were and that sort of thing; never the subject matter. They could see perfectly well what it was—they’re not stupid—but they’d rather talk about how it was done, which seemed to me immaterial. But there you are. It was very peculiar.

      And now there’s going to be yet another referendum, so I hope to show them again. And I’ve done some prints of them as well, so if I can’t send the pictures, I’ll send the prints.

      You call them propaganda, but those abortion pictures are quite in keeping with the rest of your work. One of your central themes has always been the bizarre nature of having a physical body …

      [Laughs.] That’s wonderful! Really wonderful! I’ve never heard anyone say that before! But yes, having a physical body. That’s true.

      … and that’s what links you to that tradition of artists like Daumier, Goya and Hogarth.

      They’re social artists; they comment on what’s going on. Of course the greatest one is Goya because he shows the monsters as well. As well as showing the body, he shows what motivates and haunts people. I think that’s very important as well. That’s why I use fairy tales, to give a face to that. You’re always looking for how you’re going to show the fears that, as you say, are connected with the body. That’s all we’ve got, isn’t it? You can’t paint the soul really, because it hasn’t got any eyes or anything [laughs]. You’ve to do it through the body, even if it means exaggerating the gestures.

      You said earlier that the technical process was “immaterial,” but can I risk asking you about your printmaking? It has always been important to you, hasn’t it?

      Yes. I’ve done lots of prints. I did a lot of etching and now I’m more into lithography. When I was at art school I used to take refuge in the print room, because there you didn’t have to do art with a capital “A,” you could do whatever you wanted. I’ve always found that it’s that way with prints. It’s not quite like being a child, but you’re freer. When the prints start coming they come one after another after another. The images come out very quickly. I love that.

      And in your larger pictures, are you working exclusively with pastel now?

      Just about. [Laughs.] I know, it’s terrible, isn’t it? It comes naturally to me, because I like drawing a lot, and with pastel you draw all the time. You draw the figure inside and outside. It’s lines upon lines upon lines. I never smudge, ever. That’s cheating. I just draw the lines and build the thing up. Layer after layer. And I can change it. You can rub it out and do it again. I change pictures all the time, dramatically. So it’s jolly useful.

      Also, if you work with pastel, you have to do it from life. You have to use a model, even if it means your own models. You cannot do it from the imagination. It has to be seen to be done.


  • snezanacongradin 20:36 on 05/04/2011 Permalink |

    rashchistili ono shto ih razdvaja: obojica su zeleli djindjicjevu smrt 

Compose new post
Next post/Next comment
Previous post/Previous comment
Show/Hide comments
Go to top
Go to login
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
%d bloggers like this: