I am feeling irritated. It’s not the tag in my tee-shirt, or an eyelash in my eye. It’s this:
I should say, for the sake of accuracy, the true irritant is this:
“He made her look older than she is and her eyes don’t sparkle in the way that they do and there’s something rather dour about the face,” – Waldemar Januszczak, art critic for The Sunday Times
Dour? Her eyes don’t sparkle? The only way the artist could have made her eyes sparkle more would’ve been to add glitter. She looks as though she is seconds away from breaking into a laugh – and he calls her dour?
I’ve heard & read many similar comments, mostly made by folks who purchase their “art” at walmart, and I’m quite sick of it. How can anyone look at this beautiful portrait and feel anything negative?
She is young and lovely in life, and young and lovely on the canvas. This sweet, slightly restrained grin is classic Kate. The soft lines, radiant hair, and bright – dare I say “sparkling” – eyes are the epitome of youth. Paul Emsley is obviously a master at his craft & you can see his talent and love in this work.
AND he deserves an award for how gracefully he has handled the negative comments of all those slobbering, fool critics. I’m certain there have been far more positive reviews of Kate’s portrait by hundreds of critics who appreciate art more than the spotlight. But they certainly won’t receive any airtime. Nasty sells, you know.
Future generations will look on this portrait and sigh, “What beautiful work Mr. Emsley.” Whilst Waldemar and his ilk will be long since forgotten.