Politics for art’s sake
In the last few months, three articles have chastised Portland City Commissioner Randy Leonard for buying the portrait I painted of him. Though the Tribune article from last December and the more recent Oregonian blog post and article bring up important questions about the way in which a public official might use left over campaign funds, both these media outlets also took the opportunity to lambaste Leonard for what they see as an unforgivable display of self-love and, in the process, badmouthed my vocation. It’s time to set the record straight.
There’s nothing more democratic than a portrait. The genre may have been instituted to immortalize kings and popes, but it wasn’t until the 16th century Dutch got a hold of it that the genre truly flourished. The Republic of the Seven United Netherlands was as close to a democracy as the world had seen since the ancient Greeks and Romans. While the other European nations reserved painted portraiture for patricians, in both the Dutch Republic and the early United States everyone was as noble as their work ethic and getting richer every day. Portraiture of the people and for the people reflected democracy’s ideals as perfectly as land ownership by commoners, and played a significant role in development of an American character and culture.*
Ironic then that such a delightful expression of the free world is so easily equated with the frippery and wastefulness of an aristocracy. This unflattering and false association comes from a misreading of portraiture’s celebration of the individual. The assumption is that a person would have to be hugely self-important (and possibly even snobby and blue-blooded) to own a portrait of her-him self because no one with a proper sense of modesty would be caught looking at an image of her-him self. Um. Except when well-adjusted non-egomaniacs do that all the time. In the mirror. In official photos taken to mark special occasions. In the ever-proliferating snapshots of our digital world.
Let’s face it: we love looking at ourselves. There’s no image more interesting to an individual than one of her-him self. And what’s wrong with that? What’s so un-democratic about really trying to see oneself as others do? Isn’t it possible that a little self-reflection prompted by seeing a version of oneself might even reveal a thing or two about how one could better function in society?
Gwenn Seemel
Randy Leonard
2005
acrylic on canvas
24 x 18 inches
The real issue in these recent articles about Leonard’s portrait isn’t a City Commissioner’s campaign funds or his morals. It’s not even my work or portraiture’s embattled status as a fine art. It’s how art is generally understood in this nation today.
The United States is supposed to be the guiding light of the free world, but how can it be when art is mocked as a luxury and, more specifically, one that’s more quickly made fun of than a steakhouse dinner? Maybe that’s why the fine democracy of the state of Oregon has seen fit to divert the Oregon Cultural Trust’s money for other purposes. We’ve forgotten that art and the support of art—financial and otherwise—is integral freedom.
____________________________________________________________________
*For further reading on portraiture’s relationship to democracy, please visit this article.
____________________________________________________________________
RELATED ARTICLES:
- When my work is like a steakhouse dinner…
- “Welcome to my hanging.”
- Buying my work should qualify as an “official duty.”
CATEGORIES: - Philosophy - On portraiture -
(2) Comments / Commentaires: Politics for art’s sake
Greetings,
I was invited by artist Gween to view this entire portrait exhibit. I enjoyed it on numerous levels (smile). I agree on some levels with Gween’s perspectives and concerns. However, knowing Mr. Leonard, as I have come to appreciate him, certainly he would want to have this art of himself hanging on his office wall, however, I think part of the problem was, reportedly, he purchased it for himself using campaign funds. It would not have surprised me one bit if we had learned that good old Randy purchased his portrait with taxpayers money, because that’s how important Randy thinks he is. I enjoyed the updates on Randy
nicholas...
One could also see paying a local artist to paint your portrait as supporting local artists, as opposed to some big shot from france.
--- -- - --- - ---- - - --- ----- -- -the money spent on that portrait stays here at home. And besides, it’s a great painting, how can you not like it? All your work has always been superb.
Let them gripe, they have lost their way. When the modern media is more interested in what Brittany Spears is up to than what’s going on locally, then they have failed their duties. The media’s job is not to entertain first, but to inform. Let them flail.
Gota Dien
Nicholas