 |
| Peach Warbler, Oil on Canvas, 24 by 30 in., Private Collection |
Without getting into a discussion on the merits of this
painting, or lack thereof, let me talk about its most satisfying component – the
title. Yes, yours truly really hit it
out of the ballpark with this one.
Giving a great title to a representational oil painting on
stretched canvas is probably not the highest form of human endeavor, but don’t
quote me on that. And I don’t think any art
enthusiast has ever collapsed in spasmodic joy upon learning of the title of
one of my paintings. “A perfect appellation,
my dear boy! Bravo!” But I can’t think
of many things that are more important in the life of a painter in today’s digital
marketplace. Maybe actually selling the paintings
you title is more important, but I wouldn’t know about that.
For the most part, we are advised not to get cute with our
titles. A painting of peonies in a blue
and white vase with two peaches and a lace tablecloth, for example, should be
titled, Peonies in a Blue and White Vase
with Two Peaches and a Lace Tablecloth, because our peonies may look more
like roses, our peaches may look more like nectarines and the lace tablecloth
might look something like The Shroud of Turin.
That’s one very good reason.
Another is that Google’s little search engine won’t know where to send
prospective online customers if the title is Untitled, Symphony No. 1,
Composition No. 7, Ode to Opulence, Nature’s Bounty, Glittering Fantasy, Nocturne, Soliloquy, Keeping Silent Vigil on a Long Summer Night and
Praying for the Dawn to Break with News of a Storefront Gallery Representation. I think you get the idea.
Of course this caution about titling paintings only applies
to painters whom nobody has ever heard of, like you and me. Whistler, Picasso, Pollock, Kandinsky, et al.,
could get by with any old title that amused them. Abstract painters have enormous leeway in
titling their paintings, of course. Robert Motherwell, for example, gave his bold
abstract shapes absurd titles like Elegy to the Spanish Republic No. 110.
Well, that’s about
all I want to say about titling paintings at this time. Just wanted to let somebody else know what a
great title I came up with for this painting.
I’m not out of words quite yet, so I thought I’d break my initial
promise and talk about the painting a little bit.
The painting itself
has a couple of things I like and a couple of things I should have done better on. I like the three birds and the initial wash-in
on the right background that I left because it resembles a Chinese
landscape. I tried to get the same
feeling on the left side but failed. Ellipses
and symmetries drive me crazy, as they did here. And the foreground could have used a design makeover,
but I had no great ideas and little inclination for that task before I escorted
it to a gallery on the edge of Soho,
which regrettably closed a couple of years ago.
The gallery owner asked
all his artists what they wanted to get for their paintings. This one is a 24x30 that took four or five morning
sessions to complete, so of course I said $300.
A few months later I got a check for that amount. Don’t know what the gallery owner tacked on,
but it probably wasn’t much. He had low
rent for the gallery space and just enjoyed being in the business working with artists
whose work he admired. Would there were
hundreds more like him.
And, oh yeah, Peach
Warbler. Perfect, right?
