Comments on: Tact and compromise http://savvythinker.com/tact-and-compromise/ thinking about life, playing with makeup Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:04:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Karin http://savvythinker.com/tact-and-compromise/comment-page-1/#comment-2125 Karin Mon, 26 Mar 2007 23:46:44 +0000 http://savvythinker.com/2007/02/01/tact-and-compromise/#comment-2125 Amy adds the following: 1. Taste. It just changes, what's ugly and what's not is very much in the eyes of the viewer. 2. Assumptions and expectations. He was among the best and everyone knew it -- famous like Andy Warhol (who made a bunch of mostly heinous and at least unflattering portraits of lots of people who paid him a lot to do it). 3. Style. He was a master with paint and that was at least as important as the way things looked when he was done (particularly if they recalled - and they did - the work of his predecessor, Velazquez, who painted the very successful and much revered ancestors of the 19th century folks. 4. The job of painters. To be successful as propaganda, portraits had to look like their subjects -- you could only stray so far from the (unfortunate, in this case) reality or everyone knew it wasn't true. A combination of all these factors accounts for Goya's success and the way so many of his royal subjects look in his portraits of them. Amy adds the following:

1. Taste. It just changes, what’s ugly and what’s not is very much in the eyes of the viewer.
2. Assumptions and expectations. He was among the best and everyone knew it — famous like Andy Warhol (who made a bunch of mostly heinous and at least unflattering portraits of lots of people who paid him a lot to do it).
3. Style. He was a master with paint and that was at least as important as the way things looked when he was done (particularly if they recalled – and they did – the work of his predecessor, Velazquez, who painted the very successful and much revered ancestors of the 19th century folks.
4. The job of painters. To be successful as propaganda, portraits had to look like their subjects — you could only stray so far from the (unfortunate, in this case) reality or everyone knew it wasn’t true.

A combination of all these factors accounts for Goya’s success and the way so many of his royal subjects look in his portraits of them.

]]> By: Karin http://savvythinker.com/tact-and-compromise/comment-page-1/#comment-51 Karin Fri, 02 Feb 2007 12:46:31 +0000 http://savvythinker.com/2007/02/01/tact-and-compromise/#comment-51 Thanks, Mary! I asked Amy too, so I hope she weighs in a bit... Thanks, Mary! I asked Amy too, so I hope she weighs in a bit…

]]> By: Mary http://savvythinker.com/tact-and-compromise/comment-page-1/#comment-49 Mary Fri, 02 Feb 2007 11:36:49 +0000 http://savvythinker.com/2007/02/01/tact-and-compromise/#comment-49 LJ, excellent observation! The simple answer is that Goya was recognized during his lifetime as the great and profound genius that he was, probably the last of the 'old masters'. His pictures, including his portraits, were purposely extremely subjective and (some said) bordered on caricature. These portraits of royalty were probably pretty accurate, although somewhat unflattering. How did he get away with it? Goya was very well-connected in court circles and had many powerful patrons. The concept of royalty was hanging by a thread in Spain at this time in history, as the French people had just overthrown their king. I suspect no one was going to 'rock the boat' by complaining about their appearance in portraits. Besides, compared to the horrible subject matter in Goya's paintings before he died, I really don't think the royal collection is bad at all. :) LJ, excellent observation!
The simple answer is that Goya was recognized during his lifetime as the great and profound genius that he was, probably the last of the ‘old masters’. His pictures, including his portraits, were purposely extremely subjective and (some said) bordered on caricature. These portraits of royalty were probably pretty accurate, although somewhat unflattering. How did he get away with it? Goya was very well-connected in court circles and had many powerful patrons. The concept of royalty was hanging by a thread in Spain at this time in history, as the French people had just overthrown their king. I suspect no one was going to ‘rock the boat’ by complaining about their appearance in portraits. Besides, compared to the horrible subject matter in Goya’s paintings before he died, I really don’t think the royal collection is bad at all. :)

]]> By: Karin http://savvythinker.com/tact-and-compromise/comment-page-1/#comment-48 Karin Fri, 02 Feb 2007 04:08:06 +0000 http://savvythinker.com/2007/02/01/tact-and-compromise/#comment-48 Good question, I'll ask Mary, aka VelvetSky to answer, or maybe Amy.... Good question, I’ll ask Mary, aka VelvetSky to answer, or maybe Amy….

]]> By: Ladyjicky http://savvythinker.com/tact-and-compromise/comment-page-1/#comment-47 Ladyjicky Fri, 02 Feb 2007 01:59:22 +0000 http://savvythinker.com/2007/02/01/tact-and-compromise/#comment-47 Karin I always wondered how Goya got away with the ugly (but probably true) paintings of the Spainish royal family! Karin I always wondered how Goya got away with the ugly (but probably true) paintings of the Spainish royal family!

]]>