In 2005 I was commissioned by the office of ‘Provinciale Staten van Utrecht’ to portray the last 4 Dutch queens ‘in threes’. In total a work of 12 canvasses. It hangs in the only palace constructed for a Dutch pope. 

Why portray each queen three times? It was the way I portrayed people then (and still love to do), allowing me to show more than just one side of a person.

An example where this aspect comes out very clear: I portrayed dr. Walter Arno Noebel (http://www.bertvanzelm.com/object?object=24), a well-respected German architect. In one portrait I ‘presented’ him in this state of mind. In another I gave space to the more play full and light side of his character. It was fun to spend time with him.

Maybe the most interesting one done in this way was of the three portraits of sign. Calligaris (http://www.bertvanzelm.com/object?object=56). I portrayed him at three different ages. This gives the portrait the weight of more than just a snapshot taken of someone's life. Some fantasizing from my part was needed, but in the end the client was very satisfied.

Does there exist any other portrait like that? Not that I know of. If you know one, please write a comment about it.

Some time ago my nephew showed me an article about the English queen being portrayed from 4 different sides. http://nos.nl/artikel/2049978-elizabeth-in-viervoud-op-de-foto.html

IMAGES:

dr. W. A. Noebel

sign. Calligaris

4 Dutch Queens and on the place where it hung first

and 4 times queen Elizabeth

The video shows the way the portrait of the family Kool-Merkus arose.

Time ago a very dear friend of mine asked me about the why of portraits… Unfortunately I cannot take her to the National Gallery exhibition of ‘Goya, the portraits’ anymore.

This show cannot be missed. Rembrandt, Velazquez and Goya: three of my big heroes. And from the three, Goya is maybe the one who knew best how to ‘step out of himself’ and portray a different soul.

I was blown away by the paintings. Their presence was so much stronger than the presence of the visitors. I felt being watched by them, even though in this godless age one is not allowed to say so. They overwhelmed me. After having seen half of the rooms I had to sit down and get back to myself.

Amongst all the amazing paintings just two highlights: Rafael Esteve Vilella (museo de Bellas Artes de Valencia) and the Marquis de San Adrián (Museo de Navarra, Pamplona). Only to show the diversity of characters portrayed. But I could go on and on.

Once seen the portrait of Antonia Zarate it is a very little step to Manet’s portrait of Berthe Morisot (musee Marmottant).

This blog is getting out of hand… And then to think that it is only about the portraits of Goya…

To learn I ‘copy’ the Great Masters every once in a while and amongst the images shown here of the paintings of Goya and Manet you’ll find one of those (and of course there is the ‘magician’ in the mixed media of the former blog).

IMAGES:

Goya: Rafael Esteve Vilella, Marquis de San Adrián and Antonia Zarate.

Manet: Berthe Morisot

Study made by me: Signora con abanico (not shown in London, click on the name and the sketch opens up in a new window)

(Useless to say the images show not even 3% of the originals) 

Amongst the pop artists Peter Blake stands out for me. His work may be very different from mine, but he is a big inspiration. Because soon I’ll be in London, I dedicate this blog to him. Not all of his work I like, probably because I am interested in only certain areas of the world of images.

What I (amongst other) love about him is that he does not seem to care about ‘high’ and ‘low’ art. He does what he wants.

At a certain moment of the documentary (see video below) I had to think of when I was a small boy lost, playing with my toys. If you can give somebody that feeling, you are a great artist.  

IMAGES:

Peter Blake:

'The Beatles 1962'

'The owl and the pussycat'

'Have a nice day mr. Hockney'.

Me:

'He pulled a rubber out of the hat' (http://www.bertvanzelm.com/object?object=122)

'An imitation showing the Elvis jojo'  (http://www.bertvanzelm.com/object?object=195)

and a photo of the artist himself as a cowboy calling his mom.

It is one of my all time favorite stories. Maybe it is a lie, but who cares.

The great Japanese artist Katsushika Hokusai * was 94 years old and dying. He was furious; according to his calculations he still needed 11 years of hard study to be able to make the perfect print. I feel the same.

No worries, I am not dead yet. I have only been painting professionally for about 40 years, so there is still a long road to walk down. One is never too old to learn.

A new window has opened today. A fresh wind blows over my old vineyard.

Painting: seduce chance to perfection a totally controlled work. I am on my way once again…

*: if I am not mistaken his name meant: mad artist.

IMAGES: a cursing old man (sorry, Great Mad Master), the Mountain and a sketch by the Great Mad Master, a painting underway and a happy and slightly infuriated painter.

Lately I have picked landscape painting up again. Why? Apart from the true answer (= I don’t know), there are possible reasons:

• I was deeply impressed by the Turner exhibition in London. It gave me appetite to make some myself.
• I was commissioned a seascape and once I picked up the theme, I wanted to continue.
• I am very interested in creating false depth (the canvas is flat).
• By eliminating a dramatic subject (human being), I can concentrate better on light.

Let’s name some other landscape painters. As I said, I was deeply impressed by the late landscapes of Turner. But there are many more that have been an inspiration for many years: Hercules Seghers, Philips Koninck, Hendrik Weissenbruch, J. H. van Mastenbroek, Monet, Emil Nolde. Just to name a few…

So why then still paint new landscapes, when there are already so many that I like?

Since a couple of weeks we have a young cat. Sometimes the animal drives me crazy. I have to shut her in the kitchen when I work. She is always around me, wants to know what I am doing. I have to avoid her jumping on the palette, grab for my brushes or just sit behind my feet.

I must be gifted with the same kind of irritable characteristic. I want to copy (= learn), interpret and paint my version… I have this desire to make things, not just to observe.

I made 'Black Rain'... 

I love the protest against Renoir (see attachment below: artnet: scroll it down). Not because I am not a big fan of Renoirs late paintings. But because I love that these people do not seem to care about market values or reputations.

In a time where so much seems to be about these two items and not if a work is painted well or a subject has been approached from an interesting angle, it is like a fresh wind blown through a stinking stable. The sad thing is that much of the discussion has slided towards the wrong side, namely just sensation.

In Renoir’s days photography took over a way of representing the real world, so artists were (thankfully) forced to give their works a painterly interesting twist. The explosion of different styles as Impressionism, Expressionism, Fauve, Nubis, and Cubism we can thank to the wide spreading of photography. But it does not mean that all that is not realistically painted is nice. And for me this is the case with the late works of Renoir.

I don’t care that he loved young girls with fat bottoms. As long as he painted them well! And ‘his girls’ look so much like flat sculpted cotton candy. (I realize that I might give some sculptor ideas about a new material. I have seen worse in the Stedelijk Museum (sculptures made out of washing powder)).

In the arts nobody is holy for me. This counts even for some Vermeers. If I would find one I don’t like on a flea market, not knowing it was made by him (so very expensive!!!), I would not buy for 10 euros… And the Renoir in the Courtauld is one I love…

(title of my sketch next to the Renoir: 'SHAKE BEFORE USE (CAREFULLY THOUGH)').

I love to see how others work. It makes me get off my horse and try to get on another one.

I remember changing paintings halfway with Els Janssens during art school classes. I made a total mess of her work. I was unable to enter her color scheme. She was an amazing talent. After the academy I left for Italy and when I came back three years later, she had vanished. Here you see Els (where are you?) and some of her sketches made centuries ago (Gerrit Rietveld Academie, 1980). Next to her: Diego, Giacometti's brother, copied by me. You can find him in one of my art history sketches. Which sketch is it? 

To make a bridge, Giacometti has been falsified many times, I guess. It is not as easy as Warhol (see my last blog and then under: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-VFhb-oxHU minute: 27.00-30.27), but still, a minimal sketch should not be too difficult.

In my sketch-blocks there must be a ‘Giacometti: Man with a Hard Penis’ somewhere or did I give that sketch to my dear friend Bea Meulman? 

Does an artist still need to be alive for making his artwork (did Andy Warhol miss a big chance)?

The question seems more ridiculous than it is.

Some time ago I stumbled on this article:

http://in.reuters.com/article/2015/09/10/usa-arttheft-california-idINKCN0RA2OI20150910

I had already prepared a blog about Warhol and this shows once more the value of his work as a ‘unique’ series of objects linked to him alone.

Andy Warhol showed that practically everything was worth being interpreted (soup cans, coca cola bottles and later; celebrities, fatal accidents and electric chairs). No worries over composition, color use and other. Technically, he embraced ‘mistakes’. Mass reproduction was essential. He was careful not to show any personal expression. All was gorgeous.

And more, it was of no importance that he made his own work. Probably quite often he did not sign it himself. Many ideas came from his assistants and could be endlessly copied, once made.

A machine can be remade, is not unique. Could it have been Warhol’s possible best ever move to have taken care of his work still being produced by his assistants after his death? I think it is a missed opportunity (and honestly I think there are still many ‘new Warhols’ made; it’s easy money). Out in the open this could have been his last and biggest contribution on how we think about art nowadays.

Let’s all make our own ‘original Warhols’! Everybody is an artist, everything is art.

Look at these five fragments:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-VFhb-oxHU

Minute: 27.00 till 30.27.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnhqRiJ4KH8

Minute: 56.10 till 1.04.33.

Minute: 1.08.30 till 1.08.52.

Minute: 1.16.20 till 1.16.43

Minute: 2.28.50 till 2.30.12

In the north many have come back from vacation, schools have started. Here in Spain we happily go on till the beginning or even half of September. So I start with a ‘sunny’ blog.

I love this article. It is fun and gives hope for the old fashioned artist. The one who still wants to make art, not in supermarket quantities and not without technical depth. Food for thought...

About number 6 of the statements: I worked from 1992 till 2008 on and off on the work ‘Setting Sun’…

Yesterday I made a self-portrait. It gives a chance to see how I look at myself. Or better, what I think of/feel about myself.

With my birthday coming up, I question if I will ever see myself as…

It is all in the eyes… I had a good look.

This is why they say that the eyes of the sculptures of  ‘Tell Asmar’ are so big (see image). They are considered to be the windows of the soul.

I kept mine smaller. I should not show too much soul?! Oh well…

It is a small portrait (see on the site: http://www.bertvanzelm.com/object?object=155 ).

I made it with the ‘uni posca markers’. It must have taken me about 12 years to have the markers do what I want. They are not really meant to be used in this way, I guess. I started to use them for making sketches on trips.

In the limitation lays the challenge. I am forced to stretch beyond reach.

All the ‘art history’ sketches are made with them. It unites all the in different styles painted 'originals'.

In the summer period I will not write blogs. Have a nice summer! And let’s meet again in September!