Mrs. Corpio: Basically, this is something that would only upset racist

[FiddyBeowulf]

Obama-hating mother****ers:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210223877

MrScorpio (68,603 posts)


Basically, this is something that would only upset racist, Obama-hating mother****ers:
Behold "Judith and Holofernes" by Kehinde Wiley, painted in 2012. You may recognize the style. Yep, it was painted by the same person who just painted President Obama's portrait:

Yeah, that style is tacky. Bad wallpaper/dogs playing poker tacky. But it does not upset me though. It reminds me of the portrait Ted Striker was painting in Airplane only with out the bush style background.

[67 Rover]

What happens when you put a Black light on it?

[Happy Fun Ball]

What happens when you put a Black light on it?

It will probably glow like a motel bed.

[FiddyBeowulf]

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210219889

$kinner starts a thread on other works by the artist.  He pastes a bunch of crap that looks like it was done using a paint-by-numbers kit.

[SVPete]

Mooch-chelle's portrait barely resembles her, and BHO's left hand either has one too many fingers or the thumb is on the wrong side.

Here is one of Kehinde Wiley's (painter of BHO's portrait) "artworks":



MrCorpulent should be asked who the real racist is!

[SVPete]

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210219889

$kinner starts a thread on other works by the artist.  He pastes a bunch of crap that looks like it was done using a paint-by-numbers kit.

I see Skinner chose not to post the work I posted above. I wonder why .........

[SVPete]

BTW, I find this official portrait of Jerry Brown from his first regime rather hideous:





It hangs in the Capitol building in Sacramento, along with portraits of other governors. Anyway, I don't care about skin color when it comes to appreciating portraits.

[DumbAss Tanker]

The one of her looks like a poster slapped together in about six hours as a print of a collage of colored paper and somebody else's face.  On the plus side, the face is more attractive than Moose's.

His has a decent facial likeness, but the background looks like some kind of hermit folk-art thing, with the chair floating in space among the leaves.  The shade of the leaves is close enough to the figure's values that it's practically a 'Find the hidden object' picture.

I guess the tacky upholstery-fabric backgrounds are a thing with Black artists but they look stupid to me.

[SVPete]

... the background looks like some kind of hermit folk-art thing, with the chair floating in space among the leaves.  The shade of the leaves is close enough to the figure's values that it's practically a 'Find the hidden object' picture.

I guess the tacky upholstery-fabric backgrounds are a thing with Black artists but they look stupid to me.

If you check out Kehinde Wiley's artwork via Google images you'll see that some sort of floral/botanical wallpaper-like print is in a large percentage of Wiley's portraits.

[BadCat]

Who's upset?

They're fugly paintings, but to each their own.

[FlaGator]

Obama's painting should have been of a phone and a pen in a pickle jar full of urine sitting on top of a blank Executive Order.

[FiddyBeowulf]

More fitting for Obama:

[Wineslob]

If you check out Kehinde Wiley's artwork via Google images you'll see that some sort of floral/botanical wallpaper-like print is in a large percentage of Wiley's portraits.

As is cutting the heads off of whitey.

[DLR Pyro]

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210219889

$kinner starts a thread on other works by the artist.  He pastes a bunch of crap that looks like it was done using a paint-by-numbers kit.

seems kinda racist since he only only paints blacks.

correction, he does paint the heads of white people decapitated by the blacks

Personally  I think they would have been better served if they used the artist who did this fine work

[freedumb2003b]

The one of her looks like a poster slapped together in about six hours as a print of a collage of colored paper and somebody else's face.  On the plus side, the face is more attractive than Moose's.

His has a decent facial likeness, but the background looks like some kind of hermit folk-art thing, with the chair floating in space among the leaves.  The shade of the leaves is close enough to the figure's values that it's practically a 'Find the hidden object' picture.

I guess the tacky upholstery-fabric backgrounds are a thing with Black artists but they look stupid to me.

I mentioned this on TOS:

I showed the painting of mike the wookie to and asked the totally zero political Mrs. FD who it was.  I kid you not, she said "hillary clinton!"

I am still laughing!

[SVPete]

... mike the wookie ...

Moochbaca? And Choombaca?

[Old n Grumpy]

If they painted the mooch like real life they would have gottn sued over it looking to much like chewbacka.

[BamaMoose]

For the Big Bang fans:



I think the reason the DUmmies are really upset by the whole discussion about the portraits is that everyone agrees that they suck.  Bipartisan support in just how bad the paintings are.  So in order to be a good Democrat you must like the paintings, because Obama is perfect, etc, etc, blah, blah, blah.  Keep playing the race card, it's been so successful so far.

[USA4ME]

I don't know what the boy primitive is talking about, and neither does he. I don't know anyone who is "upset" (as he claims) about the portrait. I know a lot of people who are laughing at how stupid it looks. To me, he's sitting in front of a wall of poison ivy, which seems fitting.

.

[BattleHymn]

What happens when you put a Black light on it?

Funny you should ask...



Never hire an artist whose trademark is hiding sperm in his work.

[landofconfusion80]

Just some quality Trump art to even things out

[DUmpsterDiver]

Mister Ross or Rodgers could do better.  Get over it DUmmys.  ESAD as needed.

[USA4ME]

It's always funny to watch Lamond try and sound smart, but he just can never pull it off.

Latest example (all from Lamont's post):

MrScorpio

"Judith and Holofernes" is the title of the painting, so there's no mistake as to what the subject matter is about. It's in the GAWD DAMNED BIBLE! You'd think that a gaggle of right wing nut jobs would figure out that the painting came out of a biblical scenario, right? Wrong. These people are just too stupid and racist to figure any of that that out.

The account of the beheading of Holofernes by Judith is given in the deuterocanonical Book of Judith

Lamond, the boy primitive, believes the "Book of Judith" is "in the **** ****** BIBLE", but it's not. It is not part of the biblical canon. Now, I know the word "deuterocanonical" is a big word with lots of letters, which is something that easily confuses Lamond, but if he were to understand it he could have saved himself the embarrassment. But there's a big difference between protocanonical books and deuterocanonical books and the reason they are categorized as such. Most Bible students could care less about the deuterocanonical books, something that Lamond is too dumb to know why.

But that inability to think thing always gets in the way of the boy primitive.

.

[SVPete]

MrScorpio

"Judith and Holofernes" is the title of the painting, so there's no mistake as to what the subject matter is about. It's in the GAWD DAMNED BIBLE! You'd think that a gaggle of right wing nut jobs would figure out that the painting came out of a biblical scenario, right?

USA4MEhas it right. The Book of Judith will not be found in Bibles used in most Protestant churches (the Anglican Communion would be an exception). It wasn't until the 1546 Council of Trent that Judith (and other deuterocanonical writings) was dogmatically accepted as canonical by the Catholic Church. For the sake of a chronological reference point, Martin Luther died in 1546.

In other words, were MrCorpulent to waddle into an Evangelical or Fundamentalist church full of "right wing nut jobs" he would not find the Book of Judith in their "GAWD DAMNED BIBLES", and if he asked about it the only ones likely to have a clue what he's talking about would be those who had been Catholics or had perused a Catholic Bible (like me).

But let's compare the story of Judith (it's not historical) with Wiley's paintings. Judith was a beautiful widow, and Israel was beset by the Assyrians. Judith used her feminine wiles to get into the confidence (but not bed) of Holofernes. Once she gains his trust, she hacks off his head at night and quickly and quietly returns with it to her Israelite city. The Assyrians, seeing their general beheaded, fled. With that quickie summary:

* Jews and Assyrians (or Babylonians) are ethnically similar, separated by time and geography; in Wiley's paintings, the "Judith" figure is black, and the "Holofernes" character is white;

* In the Book of Judith, Judith is a woman and Holofernes is a man; in Wiley's paintings, "Judith" and "Holofernes" are both women;

* Judith's return with the head of Holofernes was secretly and at night (traditional paintings of the story depict her return as being in darkness); in Wiley's paintings the scene is fully lit (this is a minor thing, but it is a departure from the story and traditional paintings that are the supposed inspiration).

Assign whatever percentage of "inspiration" you will to the Book of Judith and older paintings, the departures from the story in Wiley's paintings show an intent to depict whites as blacks' deadly enemies, and white women in particular to be the enemies of black women.

It should not take that much explanation, but no matter how deeply one consider's those two paintings by Wiley, they are clearly (to those willing to admit it) racist.

[SVPete]

Maybe MrCorpulent should done a little, a VERY little, research before spouting off his racism!

But one already stands out: a tall, elegant black woman in a long blue dress—the canvas is enormous, eight feet by ten feet—calmly staring down the viewer. In one hand, she holds a knife. In the other, a cleanly severed brunette female head. “It’s sort of a play on the ‘kill whitey’ thing,” Wiley says.