A friend of mine, a former student and a very talented painter, Ryan Daffurn has recently been in Russia and sent me a link to the work of a Russian artist he rather admired. His exact words were "there are painters, then there are painters!". I have to agree, this guy can paint - his tone, observation, color are all superb. His subjects are very simple - mostly busty nudes, and they often display a bit of humor.
I have heard some people describe his work as "its only illustration" as if that makes it somewhat unworthy to be taken seriously. I have heard the same thing said of the work of John Singer Sargent and if more people in the Anglo Saxon world knew of Joaquín Sorolla (a Spanish painter I admire and a contemporary of Sargent) I am sure I would hear the similar comments.
I never have figured out what the great difference is between us visual artists, illustrators, designers, photographers, cinematographers, musicians etc is. We are all artists. It is true that some have a particularly beautiful heart or poetic vision that we might find easier to relate to than with some other artist, and there are some who have better skills than others. In most of the arts great skill is regarded as fundamental. The more skillful a guitarist is the more we clap and cheer. It could be argued that the greater the skills, the easier it is for an artist to convey the feelings and thoughts behind the performance.
It is a general observation of mine that people who have never learnt the skill to render the human figure with this degree of realism find it relatively easy to disparage those who can as "mere illustrators" while those who can paint with this degree of skill don't seem to differentiate between those who paint surface effects of light and those who feel a need for some kind of approved "seriousness". Those who can paint with classical skill are aware of their own struggles with depicting the human form, and thus give due respect to those who can.
After all, what is the difference between this work and that of Renoir? Both artists display a simple love of doing no more than paying homage to their vision of female beauty. I do not think that Raphael was trying to do anything very different when he was painting his sweet and realistic depictions of madonnas.
In the paintings of Viktor Lyapkalo I see an artist at play. I see an artist who loves the flow of paint from his brush. I see a simple pleasure in the very act of making artwork. He does it with panache. He does it is a way that makes it look easy. If he were in my studio today I would feel very honored to be sharing a vodka with him and drinking to the gods and goddesses of art. I would also drink to all those models who posed for him and to the artist for depicting them so well.
Comments