Nov 16, 2018

David Hockney painting sells for $90.3m, a record for a living artist

0 comments

A celebrated swimming pool painting by the British modern artist David Hockney sold for $90.3m in New York on Thursday, setting a new auction record for a living artist, the auctioneer Christie’s said.

 

 

Portrait of an Artist (Pool with Two Figures)Portrait of an Artist (Pool with Two Figures)
A woman looks at Portrait of an Artist (Pool with Two Figures) at a press preview.

 

READ MORE

New Posts
  • Untitled 22 from "Banksy Captured," courtesy of Steve Lazarides. Banksy’s ex-dealer Steve Lazarides is releasing a book of unseen photographs of the street artist in action captured during the time they worked together, before Banksy skyrocketed to global fame. Banksy Captured is coming out in December, and the first 50 readers to get their hands on it will have the chance to win a rare Banksy screen print. Lazarides’s 250-page book of photographs document the 11 years that the former dealer worked with Banksy as his agent, photographer, and right-hand man. The images lift the veil on the secrecy surrounding the elusive artist, offering a behind-the-scenes look at some of his famous works while they were being executed. Asked why the time felt right to release the images now, Lazarides tells Artnet News, “I only recently got the negatives out of my loft. The date is just how long it took me to scan and edit them, and then put a book together. Nothing more to it than that.” The photographs will also be available as limited-edition prints with prices starting at £450 ($582).  Lazarides began his career as a photographer who documented British subcultures and underground movements such as the early 1990s rave scene, skater communities, and the early days of street art. The book, which will be self-published and self-distributed by Lazarides, comes out in December and is available for £25 ($32). Pissing copper from “Banksy Captured,” courtesy of Steve Lazarides. Courtesy of artnet.com Read full article: https://news.artnet.com/art-world/banksys-former-dealer-photos-see-highlights-1695195
  • Lavinia Fontana, “Portrait of the Maselli family” (ca. 1565-1614), oil on canvas, 102 x 138 cm (image via Wikipedia ) Lavinia Fontana asked her fiancée to sign an unusual marriage contract before they exchanged rings in 1577. Fontana wouldn’t be providing a dowry, as was customary in her native Italy. Instead, the Bolognese artist committed to financially supporting her husband, as long as they agreed to live under her father’s roof and she could continue painting in her family’s workshop. Her husband agreed. And with good reason: Fontana was a phenomenal success. Fontana — who will be featured in a two-artist exhibition at Madrid’s Prado Museum this month, alongside her contemporary, court painter Sofonisba Anguissola — is considered the first professional female artist active in any European city. Other women (including Anguissola) had been working in court settings or convents, which were more supportive of female painters. Fontana, on the other hand, competed with male contemporaries on the open art market, and her career helped pave the way for others. Fontana’s father, artist Prospero Fontana, taught her to paint a wide range of images. While most women of the time were limited to portraits and still lifes (genres that could easily be painted in a domestic setting), Fontana’s roughly 110 paintings include 23 public altarpieces. For the most part, though, she was sought after for her portraits, mainly commissioned by noblewomen. “For some time, all the Ladies of the City would compete in wishing to have her close to them,” wrote Count Carlo Cesare Malvasia, an artist biographer, in his 1678 anthology . “The greatest thing they desired would be to have her paint their portraits, prizing them in such a way that in our day no greater prices could be charged by a Van Dyck .” Fontana’s professional life was impressive; her ability to support herself, her husband, and her 11 children with her painting was a rare accomplishment. But she had some help from her hometown. “There was something about Bologna that was conducive to female creativity,” writes Babette Bohn, Renaissance art history professor at Texas Christian University and author of the forthcoming book from Penn State University Press, Women Artists, Their Patrons, and Their Publics in Early Modern Bologna . Elisabetta Sirani, “Portia Wounding Her Thigh” (1664), oil on canvas, 101 x 138 cm (image via Wikipedia ) Why was Bologna, the largest city in northern Italy, so receptive to women artists? Bohn told Hyperallergic , “A few factors include the city’s unusual political structure and the diversity of artistic patronage, from the lower-middle class up, the liberalizing presence of the university, and an already-existing tradition of accomplished women in other cultural sectors (that is, besides the visual arts).” Instead of being ruled by just one powerful family (like the art-loving Medicis of Renaissance Florence), Bologna was unusually ruled by a senate of 70 noble families — all of whom could afford and wanted to patronize art. Bolognese clientele was also more diverse, with people from the lower-middle class and upwards, including barbers, pharmacists, butchers, and university professors, buying art. And women had long been given educational opportunities outside the home in Bologna. The city’s university was established in the 11th century and began admitting women students as of the 13th century. (Fontana was an alumna, holding a doctorate.) As a result of these conditions, Bologna boomed with professional women artists, primarily painters. Of the 300 active painters in the city during the 1600s, around 25 were women — more than in any other Italian city. Some of these artists learned in family workshops, like Fontana, and, later on, Elisabetta Sirani. Beginning in the mid-1600s, women not related to a painter could attend the first art school for women that existed outside a convent, established by Sirani. And Sirani’s roughly 12 students weren’t painting floral arrangements or portraits of pearl-adorned ladies, either; they, like their teacher, specialized in history painting — then considered the most intellectually challenging genre and one that women couldn’t handle. Fontana, Sirani, and the latter’s students followed a succession of female Bolognese artists, beginning with Caterina Vigri, a nun who painted miniatures in the mid-1400s that remained within her convent. Vigri’s reputation quickly spread outside the convent walls, though, and her fame reached local cult status after her death. This admiration — which led to her beatification in 1592 and being named the patron saint of the Bolognese art academy in 1710 — contributed to a local culture that was particularly receptive to the idea of female artists. Properzia de’ Rossi, “Joseph and Potiphar’s Wife” (ca. 1525–26), marble (image via Wikipedia ) Following Caterina Vigri was Properzia de’ Rossi, one of the only known woman sculptors in early 1500s Italy, who began her career carving intricate designs in peach and cherry pits and later progressed to publicly commissioned marble sculpture. She was the only female artist with her own dedicated biography chapter in the first edition of early art historian Giorgio Vasari ’s Lives of the Artists (1550), and her bas-relief, “Joseph and Potiphar’s Wife” (1525–26), is still on view at the San Petronio basilica in Bologna’s main square. De’ Rossi helped set the stage for Fontana, who in turn created a receptive climate for Sirani. Sirani died young, at the age of 27, but in her decade-long career she created around 200 paintings and specialized in ambitious history paintings. A child prodigy who began producing public altarpieces when she was just 17 years old, skeptics reportedly visited her studio to get visual confirmation that she (and not her father) was truly creating these works. Writer Malvasi gave Sirani a backhanded compliment in his 23-page biography of her, saying that “she worked never like a woman and more like a man.” Elisabetta Sirani, “Allegory of Charity, Justice, and Prudence” (1664), oil on canvas (image via Wikipedia ) Sirani’s personal inventory of her work lists 195 paintings made for 98 different patrons; 85 of these benefactors were men (as opposed to Fontana’s largely noblewoman clientele) and 20 were from outside Bologna, even though she never left the city, and included multiple members of the Medici family as well as other patrons in Florence, Genoa, and Milan. Sirani paid her successes forward by opening a school, attended by artists such as Lucrezia Scarfaglia, Lucia Casalini Torelli, and Teresa Muratori (who painted the only recorded fresco by a woman during this period). Together, all these artists gave Bologna such notoriety around Italy that even great Baroque painter Artemisia Gentileschi considered relocating there. “We do have some correspondence to and from Gentileschi that suggests that she was considering a move to Bologna, evidently based on its reputation,” Bohn explains. “Although she never actually moved there.” Research on the women artists of Bologna is ongoing; there are still a lot of forgotten names and stories to unearth. Florence, Rome, and Venice are typically celebrated and trafficked as the grand artistic centers of Italy, but Bologna was also an art hub, for very different reasons. This more egalitarian history could place the city squarely on the art-trekking map, where it belongs. Courtesy of hyperallergic.com Read original article here: https://hyperallergic.com/522392/women-artists-bologna-lavinia-fontana/
  • Installation view of the Fluxus gallery, “At the Border of Art and Life,” at the Museum of Modern Art (photo by Dessane Lopez Cassell/Hyperallergic) I know runners can under-train for a marathon, but until I visited the new supersize Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) — all additional 47,000 square feet of it — I didn’t know it was possible to be out of shape for a museum. This is not a place to breeze through in a morning. The renovation aims to be big enough to not only hold the institution’s art, but its promises. Early reports touted a more inclusive MoMA, one that reckoned with what and who it was missing in its collection, particularly artists who aren’t white and male. One that recognized the importance of multiple mediums, including video and performance art, and mixed them within a single gallery. Mostly, the new MoMA has made innovative choices. Sometimes that feels like leveling the playing field for certain art movements, as with Grace Hartigan ’s “Shinnecock Canal (1957)” hung next to Willem de Kooning ’s “Untitled XIX” (1977). They’re both color-heavy paintings by Abstract Expressionists, and it feels right that for such a macho art scene, Hartigan should be right alongside de Kooning. Grace Hartigan’s “Shinnecock Canal (1957)” and Willem de Kooning’s “Untitled XIX” (1977) displayed on the right wall (photo by Dessane Lopez Cassell/Hyperallergic) It’s heartening to see more performance and time-based art, like Ana Mendieta ’s “Untitled (Glass on Body Imprints—face)” (1972), photographs in which the artist, by pressing her face up against a glass window, turns her body not simply into a canvas, but into material, like paint or clay. Her nose meets her eyes, her cheeks become balloons. Those orb-like eyes look out onto Eleanor Antin ’s “100 Boots” as if avidly following the postcards depicting the boots’ adventures from California to New York. Ana Mendieta, “Untitled (Glass on Body Imprints—face)” (1972) (photo by Dessane Lopez Cassell/Hyperallergic) The rehang also better integrates film and video art. An excerpt from Jacques Tati’s “Playtime” plays through the glass and steel planks of a building facade that was lifted from the original United Nations. It’s the kind of structure that the film’s characters get hilariously lost in. Jacques Tati’s “Playtime” screening on “Façade from the United Nations Secretariat Building, New York, New York” (1952) (photo by Dessane Lopez Cassell/Hyperallergic) Lime Kiln Club Field Day (1913/2014) dir. by Edwin Middleton, T. Hayes Hunter on view in the early film and photography gallery (photo by Dessane Lopez Cassell/Hyperallergic) Other times, it feels like the museum hasn’t gone far enough. The collection remains largely chronological: the fifth floor has art from 1880 to 1940, the fourth floor spans 1940 to 1970, and then the second floor ends with 1970 to the present (the third floor is devoted to special exhibitions). Some of that is expected, even welcome. Claude Monet’s “Waterlilies” gets its own room, which is a great visual palate cleanser, a recharging station for tired eyes and legs. Claude Monet, “Water Lilies” (1914–26) (photo by Dessane Lopez Cassell/Hyperallergic) Installation view of Constantin Brancusi sculptures (photo by Dessane Lopez Cassell/Hyperallergic) Vincent van Gogh’s “Starry Night” alongside Henri Rousseau “The Sleeping Gypsy” (1897) (photo by Dessane Lopez Cassell/Hyperallergic) The “19th Century Innovators” gallery contains the greatest hits of Impressionism, like Vincent van Gogh’s “Starry Night” and other works by Paul Gauguin and Henri Rousseau. While it’s important to visit old friends, and there’s an attempt at juxtaposition — with a case in the center of the room featuring bronze and black earthenware pots by George Ohr — I still wondered whether there were additional options for introducing less heralded artists from the same time. Still, Picasso is around every corner of the fifth floor. And for all the promises of inclusion, the museum has kept its “In And Around Harlem” gallery, which despite excellent work from Romare Bearden , Jacob Lawrence , and Alice Neel , still feels uncomfortably like shoving Black subjects into their own corner. Jacob Lawrence, The Migration Series (1940–1941) (photo by Jasmine Weber/Hyperallergic) Before this renovation, Faith Ringgold ’s “American People Series #20: Die” (1967) hung in a hallway, directly across from an escalator (an unfortunate transitory space, although one with a captive audience). Now it’s moved next to Picasso’s “Les Demoiselles d’Avignon,” whose posed, angular nudes also echo Louise Bourgeois ’s “Quarantania, I” (1947-53), its wooden, white figures, resembling needles, huddled together. Faith Ringgold’s “Die” (1967) from her American People Series and Pablo Picasso’s “Les Demoiselles d’Avignon” (1907) (photo by Jasmine Weber/Hyperallergic) Installation view of Pablo Picasso and Louise Bourgeois (photo by Jasmine Weber/Hyperallergic) It’s heartening to see that Ringgold get prime real estate alongside Picasso, but her piece is just one among a sea of his. The wall text discusses Picasso’s “Guernica” as an inspiration for Ringgold’s frank depictions of fear and violence (though that painting is in Madrid) and while the comparison is striking, Picasso remains the focal point of the room, making her inclusion feel unbalanced, if not tokenistic. Why not more Ringgolds? Henri Matisse’s “The Red Studio” (1911) (left) and Alma Thomas’s “Fiery Sunset” (1973) (photo by Jasmine Weber/Hyperallergic) There’s a similar feeling with Alma Woodsey Thomas ’s 1973 “Fiery Sunset” — the lone work by a person of color in a room dedicated to Matisse. Its abstract blue swirls against a red background pairs well with Matisse’s “The Red Studio” nearby, the slight variations in their shades in friendly competition. But again, why not more? The opening rehang will have a rehang of its own in April, as a third of the permanent collection is set to change every six months. Perhaps it’s a pilot program to test the abilities of MoMA’s audience to handle change. I hope it’s only the beginning. Wilhelm Lehmbruck’s “Standing Youth” (1912) and “Kneeling Woman” (1911) (photo by Dessane Lopez Cassell/Hyperallergic) David Tudor and Composers Inside Electronics Inc., “Rainforest V (variation 1)”(1973–2015) on view in the Marie-Josée and Henry Kravis Studio (photo by Dessane Lopez Cassell/Hyperallergic) One of the exterior façades of the new MoMA (photo by Dessane Lopez Cassell/Hyperallergic) Courtesy of Ilana Novick, hyperallergic.com READ FULL ARTICLE

© 2017 by Artville Academy  |  artvilleacademy@gmail.com  |  
 

+91 96209 364 87

+91 9742 020 666

Artville Academy and Art Cafe

711,3rd cross, HRBR layout 1st block, Kalyan Nagar

Bangalore - 560043

Artville Academy and Artist Residency

314, 5th Main, HRBR layout 2nd block, Kalyan Nagar

Bangalore - 560043

Artville Academy,

No.9, Myrtle Ln, Richmond Town, 

Bangalore - 560025