In my dissertation I analysed the work of the American photorealists of the 1960s and early 1970s. My practice at that time was heavily reliant on the use of photographic source material and my desire to paint in a strongly realist style naturally led me to look at artists such as Chuck Close, Ralph Goings, Richard Estes and Robert Bechtle.
The aesthetic aspect of their work, their technique and application were what initially attracted me to them, but after researching their work, their backgrounds and listening to these artists in the comprehensive and extensive interviews on the Smithsonian Archives of American Art website http://www.aaa.si.edu/ I began to find myself drawn to other qualities in their work.
These artists chose to paint the things they knew well, their own time and era, the people and things around them, their neighborhoods, their own societies. Of these artists Close and Bechtle were the ones I kept returning to most. Close obviously as he is a portrait artist and as such he paints people that will attract our attention. He tells his subjects stories through their expressions, features, lines, folds and marks faces as many portrait artists before and since have done. What interested me about Close though was how he has kept his work fresh and interesting. His constant exploration of materials, processes and scale keep his work dynamic and give the viewer another element to think about.
“…the way you chose to make something influences the way it looks and therefore what it means.” (Arthur, n.d. cited in Lucie-Smith, 1994, p.189)
This has encouraged me to look at how I can explore and incorporate other approaches to bring more punch and points of interest into my own portrait work. Of the two artists though, Bechtle I found particularly interesting. On the surface his work seems a dry exercise in technique and aesthetics, but when viewed as a whole, particularly his figurative work the sociological content becomes the strongest element.
“These images” Bechtle has said, “are about where and how I and my family have lived. It may not be perfect, but it’s not something I can turn my back on. To a considerable extent, I am a product of this place.” (Bechtle, 2005, cited in Bishop et al, 2005, p. 41)
Collectively the works become a portrait of a whole particular social group. His middle class neighborhood, the cars they drive, the houses they live in, the clothes they wear and in his group portraits the way they interact with each other and the environment they live in. Bechtles work has helped to open my eyes to a way of including sociological content into my work without direct and aggressive comment. The even and unbiased way Bechtle has approached his work has been helped by the use of the camera in gathering the source material and Bechtle’s fairly faithful reproduction of that photographic image. His camera makes no artistic decisions and Bechtles use of the camera, like my own use of the camera, allows us a neutral perspective and allows the viewer to make their own minds up on the subject matter presented to them.
“If one of Bechtles themes is the kind of bourgeois respectability embodied by the carefully manicured homes and possessions of average Americans, the viewer’s attitude toward that subject will be determined more by his or her own nationality, social status, and ideological beliefs than by any editorializing on the part of the artist.” (Bishop et al, 2005, p.56)
References:
Bishop, J., Auping, M., Weinburg, J. and Ray, C. (2005) Robert Bechtle: A Retrospective. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: Berkeley University of California Press.
Illustrations:
Ill. 1. Finch, C. (2010) Chuck Close: Life. Munich: Prestel Publishing, p. 154
Ill. 2. Bishop, J., Auping, M.,Weinburg, J. and Ray, C. (2005) Robert Bechtle: A Retrospective. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: Berkeley University of California Press, p.86
Ill. 3. Chase, L. (1988) Ralph Goings. New York: Harry N.Abrams, Inc, p.7
