The other day I was looking through an issue of American Art Collector and saw a brief article on an upcoming artist. It showed some stylized paintings of people, mostly women. So I quickly scanned through the text and immediately found the sentence I thought I would find. It said that the artist had really found his style after taking a workshop with Milt Kobayashi.
My immediate thought was, “Dude, you didn’t find your style. You found his style.” The paintings all had the same sort of pretty caricaturization that is the hallmark of Kobayashi’s style. It’s attractive, but rather cloying.
I’ve had this experience before. I’ll see a few paintings by an “emerging” artist and think, “clone of David Leffel.” Then I’ll look and see that Leffel is cited as a teacher. Or once I was at an open studio event and saw a bunch of expressionist paintings. “Oskar Kokoschka,” I thought. And darned if her bio didn’t state that she had studied with Kokoschka.
I’m not sure how I feel about this phenomenon. Once upon a time, it was pretty normal for a student to develop a style similar to a master’s: c.f. Van Dyck and Rubens, for example. These days, however, it seems a bit of a shame when a painter is presented as some sort of great talent when that talent really amounts to replicating another painter’s signature style.
That doesn’t mean that you should have no influences, but blatant copying of a style seems rather much, I think. Beyond that, I tend to be a bit disappointed when all of the students of a famous teacher such as Leffel seem to turn out paintings just like the teacher’s. It seems as if the job of a painting teacher is to help each student paint their own paintings, not more of the teacher’s work.
Tags: art teachers, artists, David Leffel, Milt Kobayashi, the art market
-
Hello. I am so excited to find your blog! I have searched the web for good blogs that I can find useful in my newest endeavor…oil painting. Yours is one of the FEW. I know practically nothing about oil painting except I have a strong desire to learn and have read forums and blogs and books about it. I do have a lot of confusion in my mind about types of oil paint. I have looked all around, and still can’t find the answer to my burning question. I have a couple of cheap sets of learning oil paints. I am looking to buy some nicer paint. I really want to know what oil paint brands painters LOVE and why. I will decide on what I want to spend after I have some suggestions. I am considering Gamblin at the moment. I have read mixed reviews. It would be great if you could direct me to a discussion on that (maybe you have discussed it here?) or if not, what is your experience in talking with painters?
-
Jen,
Everyone oil painter has different preferences when it comes to brands of oil paint. I mostly use Doak, Williamsburg, and Old Holland. The couple of tubes of Gamblin I have seem fine to me.
If you look around on the blog, you’ll see various posts you might find useful. If you’re a beginner, you might want to start here:
http://rourkevisualart.com/wordpress/2006/08/28/so-youve-decided-to-try-oil-painting/
-
David:
Kobayashi’s style isn’t ‘his’ style, although it is a strong mannerism he is using. If I had to call it, I’d say Kobayashi has been copying ( …appropriating … plagiarizing … whatever …) an old-time illustrator from the ’80s; a guy I used to know who’s been doing the fine-art thing for the last 15 years. His name? Malcom Lipke ( a.k.a., “Skip” Lipke).
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=skip+lipke&aq=f&oq=&aqi=
And even Skip admitted to me once how he developed his ‘thing’ from a number of Ash Can Artists working in the ’30s; the red nose, the drinking, the smoky cigarettes, and back-room bar scenes. Malcom use to study kinds sorts of paintings at the Met in NYC. And he made quite an illustration career out of it before moving on to LEPs and gallery sales.
Not that I’m diss’ing anyone when I offer the correction. After all, a good painting is a good painting, right? — assuming it is a good painting. [Ha!] I may not know Kobayashi, but I do know Lipke, and he is a great guy and strong painter when he wants to show it. Check out some of his paintings without the red-nosed people.
IMHO, once a mannerism like this becomes as strong as it has, it becomes something easy for anyone with lesser skills to knock-off, and often takes on a life of its own and becomes amplified to the point of absurdity. Like deciding to paint fat middle age couples dancing on cobble stone streets in formal attire — yet failing to attribute anything to Botero. Or worse, not even be aware that Botero painted all that before you did. (Not that there is anything wrong with Botero. [Ha!])
Just my 2 cents worth. Probably worth the same …
Nice blog. Nice to run across an unwatered down opinion every now and then.
Thomas
-
Ahhhh, you’ve touched on a VERY interesting point nobody seems to want to point out. (Btw you forgot all the Schmidty artists abounding through the pages of painting mags.) Im not sure if it’s because the teacher has such a strong personality or if the student is trying to please the teacher? “Imitation is the sincerest etc.” In any case its annoying. Another good place to mine is the Oil Painters of America…mini-Macphersons, pseudo-Sargents, etc. All prize winners.
As to Kobayashi lifting Lipke - I’ve thought that for a long time.
“A good painting is a good painting?” Not sure if this is true if the artist hasn’t been true to themselves.
-
Amen, brother! I can barely take such a strong mannerism, like Kobayashi’s, in the original artist’s work let alone in their clones’ work. It always feels like a trick or a stunt that ultimately detracts from an image, IMHO. I also agree with your comment about folks painting Boteros without even being aware of Botero. This is, on its own, validation enough for the study of art history and theory. One’s art has context and meaning regardless of whether or not one realizes it!
Thanks for the post.
Erin
-
I was stunned to see this on paper! I see clones every where.How about all the Feschin wannabes? The Plein Aire clones are everywhere.I am a Plein Aire Painter and I have a hard enough time trying to paint then trying and copying someone else’s style. If I would like to copy a plein are painter it would be Levitan. And I dont think I could do that even if I could. Funny how all the “successfull” painters all stress finding your own style…. I think a lot of painters are afraid that what they want to say in their work nobody will see so lets paint like Schmid? Oh and I have had it up to my whiskey soaked snout with all the red bulbous monstrosities I see cropping up like dandylions after a rain. Thanks for the post!
-
Bob,
Looks like we have the same pet peeve.
-
I do not see this as the teacher not taking the proper approach to insure that a student is not just their clone. Most of Leffel’s, Schmid’s and Macpherson’s students are untrained. They follow one or two artist around and these artists are the world to them. They miss out on a Schmid’s influences and his historical relevance because they have not come up through a system of formal training. The plein air painters are more often the hobbyist than the serious artist with a voice even when they have gallery and exhibition activity going on. It is not that different than the Painting A Day painter. Everyone is doing Duane Keiser and they have never attended one of his classes. Keiser is all they know when they look up “artist” in their private dictionary. You cannot expect Leffel, Schmid or Macpherson to take on what an entire school and full-time program is supposed to do. They are just conducting a few classes, demos or workshops once in a while. I hear Schmid discourages this clone concept but what more can anyone do aside from stop being available to people completely? People will still copy Schmid’s work from Alla Prima. The thing about Schmid in particular is that he is such a compelling amalgamation of Sorolla, Fechin, Zorn, Sargent, Repin and Boldini. Take the best of their styles as individuals and each lacks what the rest have yet Schmid has all of it. Why would anyone want less? (rhetorical).
-
…cont. I realize some of Schmid’s students like Jeremy Lipking, Scott Burdick and Tony Pro have formal training. Of these three Burdick seems to have the strongest voice for his own preferences and ideas. He is the least Schmid-like which becomes evident when you see him work with paint as though it is cake frosting, (with great success!).
-
Michael,
I’m not necessarily criticizing folks like Schmidt or Kobayashi for teaching workshops and having students turn out clones of their style. I find it a little disappointing, but the fact is that what they are paid to do isn’t really to teach art technique, but to show students how to do what they do.
I don’t have tons of respect for the students who do that, especially when they go out and sell their work. It’s a way to achieve a measure of success, of course, but the world would be a little better if those people made their own art.
Just my $0.02.
-
-
David,
I know what you are saying.
I think these “students” are misguided or unguided really. They do not comprehend art and the artist from an artist’s point of view. They look at all of it from somewhere outside.
The professional clones are a different story. I’m fairly certain a few are convinced they are using their own voice. It is safe to expect there would be some content making a living however they could find success. Yet there are others that I wonder how they can sleep at night and face their own reflection in the mirror each day……..those that get around in professional artist circles, have the background and awareness to know better. Which is worse, knowingly riding on the success of another or being content not reaching for your own voice?
-
…I should have said I think I know what you are saying because I cannot KNOW. :-)
-
Michael,
I myself prefer artists who knowingly and openly work in someone else’s style to those who cluelessly imitate without really knowing what they are doing.
That’s an issue in much of 20th century art, now that I think of it.
-
-
Michael, you state: “I realize some of Schmid’s students like Jeremy Lipking, Scott Burdick and Tony Pro have formal training. ” Actually Tony Pro and Lipking have an illustrators training. if you want to call that formal… Lipking himself in his video says he was basically self-taught re. fine art and oils. Weistling is another who never learned oil, coming from illustration he only knew gouache.
I’m not sure formal training is all you seem to think its cracked up to be. I know quite a few artists who have had “formal training” and they think their time might have been better served… it seems to me formal training can actually lock an artist into a mindset…but methinks I’m just opening up another whole can of worms.
-
JPerrault,
Do you believe “formal training” excludes Illustration?
I do not if that somehow has been misunderstood.
The context is important. I said, “…Most of Leffel’s, Schmid’s and Macpherson’s students are untrained. They follow one or two artist around and these artists are the world to them. They miss out on a Schmid’s influences and his historical relevance because they have not come up through a system of formal training. The plein air painters are more often the hobbyist than the serious artist with a voice even when they have gallery and exhibition activity going on….”
The artists mentioned conduct informal workshops. I was comparing trained artists to hobbyists……….”formal training” can mean many things but it does not mean reading a few books, watching DVDs and taking a few classes and workshops.
There are varying qualities of formal training. Most however follow some sort of structure beginning with basic and working up to more advanced concepts. The hobbyists, on the other hand, is inclined to pick and choose what to spend time on.
The motivation is different and they are more inclined to avoid that which is uncomfortable and tedious however beneficial the activity. They are also inclined to gravitate to people who have already done the footwork and ironed out their own wrinkles. They will easily accept a single point of view as gospel and not have the motivation to seek rounded knowledge that enables them to make independent choices.
-
this is a little peeve of mine as well. In the past few years, it is amazing the number of female pastel landscape artists whose work is identical to Elizabeth Mowry’s. And I had to laugh at your Leffel reference, because I have thought the same thing - so many artists who paint just like him. Seems to be one in every art magazine I look at. There is one Mowry clone on the a daily painting website, she is putting them out at the rate of one a day. Easy to do when you don’t have to put any thought into it.
What surprises me is how these clone artists get the recognition they do. Even if they are good, they are still copying someone else’s style, and more than a few don’t even try to put a personal stamp on it. I don’t begrudge anyone making a living, but I think I would rather not paint at all than copy someone else. There is no pride in it, it defeats the whole purpose of wanting to be an artist. Now, i WAS formally trained, starting at the age of 8, but I believe I would feel this way even if I were a bored housewife, sunday painter, retired hobbyist, whatever.
Finding your own style does not come easy for every artist, perhaps that is why that even when one has talent, it is no guarantee that you will become successful. You need something different to set you apart from the rest.
Glad to hear someone else finally express this, because it really has bugged me for a while.
Great blog! -
You are so right in regards your post. I’ve railed about the same too…specifically all the Liepke/Kobayashi clones on the market (and they all seem to have taken a class with Milt too..), you’re much nicer than I, I named the one’s that irked me…
An interesting note is that Milt and Malcolm are friends and former room mates of a sort. Check around on Wet Canvas for Bruin70’s posts. That is Milt’s forum name and he has addressed their similarities in the past…is worth reading if one is even a passive admirer of either.
-
I remember Wolf Kahn once said that he wouldn’t let any students take more than one workshop with him, for fear of creating Wolf Kahn clones. Not a bad policy!
-
David,
You are correct in saying that a follower of a particular teacher should not merely turn out carbon copies of the instructor. Hopefully, an instructor imparts principles, concepts, and in their own work, some technique to assist the student on their path as a painter. If a teacher says something isn’t ‘good’ or real unless it reflects the work of that teacher, or, that it must reinforce the teacher’s own ideas, that teacher does a disservice to the student. Second rate ‘copyists’ remain just that. My own work has been associated with my one instructor (Leffel.) That doesn’t disturb me as it was merely a beginning point in my journey. Eventually, the teacher’s voice fades, and the journey begins in earnest.
I suspect that my work will deepen and evolve, just as I do as a person. I ‘ve also begun to work in other media which lets me find conclusions and the solving of problems I might not find in working with oil only. I didn’t begin to paint only to paint like someone else. I take from Leffel’s work what I can and try to move to my own conclusions. I am influenced by other painters, living and dead. To be open to other forces and experiences is to live one’s own life.
No one can take away Leffel’s rightful place as a good painter. But, we only need one Leffel. Eventually, you have to take your first attempts and guidance from others, to become your own painter, just as you would want to live your own life, and not the life of another person. This is what it means to be original and authentic. If I were only in this world to recreate Leffel’s palette, still life arrangements, etc., I would be a poor imitation of someone else.
Thanks.
M Kathryn Massey, OPA, AA
A weblog about drawing, painting, art history, color, materials, methodds, photography, composition, and other topics related to visual art.
19 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://rourkevisualart.com/wordpress/2009/12/03/style/trackback/