100 Great Artists: Part 9 - Esther

We’re nearing the end of this list... During the time I’ve been doing working through it, I’ve become aware of how entirely inadequate a mere one hundred artists is. Even if they are all – in my opinion – “greats.” Tempting as it is to attempt a second hundred, I fear that way madness lies. Perhaps a sideways look in the future will be in order. Still two entries to go on this list though.

81. František Kupka (Czech Republic, 1871-1957): Music, 1936

Franz got an honourable mention in the yellow-themed blog back in autumn for his incredible yellow self portrait. For that incredible painting alone he is one of the greats. Whilst he could clearly manage such a traditional style of painting, he also experimented successfully with industrial-style & abstract images. Music has everything I like in abstract art forms: geometry, a satisfyingly limited palette (especially darks or greys) & quite honestly, a semblance of recognisable forms. I’m an abstract-lite fan.

82. Margaret MacDonald (England, 1864-1933): The Mysterious Garden, 1911

The Mysterious Garden is classic Margaret material. Woman as possible metaphor – check. Voluminous frock – check. Otherwordly faces/figures lying about – check. Enigmatic expressions – check. You get the idea. Her patterning, compositions, often wistful colours & most of all the enormous capacity for interpretation all combines to make Margaret one of the most fascinating & influential artists to work in Scotland.

83. Keelan McMorrow (USA, 1980?): Unknown title, 2008

Don’t let anyone tell you social media is evil. As with many other artists, I came upon the work of Keelan McMorrow through social media & I can’t imagine I’d have found him any other way. I see his work as the sum of many influences, self-discipline, talent & hard work. His images are intense & fractured, at times resembling collages. I’m attracted by the realist style of painting but I stay for the fascinating details & powerful compositions.

84. Adriaen Brouwer (1605-1638): The Smokers, c. 1636

Brouwer was a painter of genre scenes, portraying the “ordinary” in society doing the things that humans do. He raised up these people by depicting them in the most skilled & beautiful works, even if they were drunk out of their skulls, hanging about insensible in pubs, gambling or fighting. There is some debate as to Brouwer’s intended moralising or otherwise behind these scenes; imbued with a good deal of humour, they don’t feel judgemental or as if they’re painted for religious instruction. They’re open to interpretation of course. If they have any message at all, the one I take is this: you’re here for a good time, not a long time, so try to enjoy it. At the same time, try not to be a complete idiot & ruin it for everyone else. This in itself is enough to vote him onto the list but you’ve surely got to love the front-&-centre self-portrait in The Smokers…

85. Paul Nash (England, 1889-1946): Totes Meer, 1941

Nash was a key 20th Century landscape & war artists whose work influenced the Modernist movement. Totes Meer (Dead Sea) shows the landscape littered with crashed, almost skeletal war planes. The moon reminds us we’re on earth & there is always something to hope for, but otherwise it’s an apocalyptic scene, part abstract, part surreal, devoid of scale & requiring context. The muted colours almost mirror those of a moonscape, long before we had photographs of the moon. Only the insignia on the wing of the plane gives us an easy identification of what we’re looking at. It’s the futility of war in painted form.

86. William Hogarth (England, 1697-1764): Characters & Chariacatura, 1743

This work is Hogarth in a huff. Barracked by critics of the day accusing him of producing only caricatures rather than any sort of fine art, he set out to prove - in this work - that what he was doing was creating real characters. He was tired of the claims he created lower art forms favouring exaggeration & depicting grotesque features in his faces. Characters & Chariacatura is his attempt to explain the difference. Included are heads copied from Raphael & da Vinci.

87. J.D.Fergusson (Scotland, 1874-1961): Le Voile Persan, 1909

One of the brilliant Scottish Colourists, Fergusson’s style was very distinctive & clean. His colours were fresh, unmuddied & impressionistic where necessary. Le Voile Persan has all the hallmark’s of Fergusson’s most influential & recognisable works. Despite working together, Fergusson & Peploe had very different styles of beginning a painting & used vastly different materials. This was discovered through analysis of paintings, examinations of paint samples as well as scanning conducted by Glasgow’s Hunterian. 

88. Jan Steen (Netherlands, 1626-1679): Rhetoricians At a Window, c. 1658-65

This is not the only occasion Steen depicted the Rhetoricians. It has been suggested that this portrayal symbolises the four temperaments: Sanguine, Choleric, Melancholic & Phlegmatic. Another artist that understood the value of sarcasm & a good laugh, Steen nevertheless covered various themes over his career. He is best known from his genre scenes & it is surely no coincidence that he came from a family of brewers. There are over three hundred of his works still in existence. 

89. Michelangelo (Italy, 1475-1564): Madonna & Child, 1504

An artist that is so parodied, copied, influential & unique must be a great on anyone’s list (although as we’ve seen, I’ve deliberately missed out a few in that category…) There is more documentary evidence about Michelangelo than anyone else of the time & in addition he was the first Western artist to have a biography written about him whilst living. As revered now as he was successful in his lifetime, his talents continue to amaze & confound.

90. David Shrigley (UK, 1968-): I Am Magnificent, ?

“The voice of my work isn’t necessarily my voice.” It would probably serve a lot of artists well to remember that this is likely to be true of most of them. When creating art, there are times you’re unsure of where the ideas come from. Part-writing, part-imagery the works of Shrigley is lo-fi & instantly recognisable. My main interest in them is based on finding them hilarious. Looking at many of them at once, you start to get into the shorthand he uses for the ideas, the wobbly style only contributing to his uniqueness. Then you wonder if they’re incredibly profound or incredibly silly.  You generally conclude they are both.