News -> Letters to the Editor TUE, MAR 17 6:00PM by Robert Russett Emeritus Professor of Art UL Lafayette

DOGGIN' THE BLUE DOGGER

Your article about George Rodrigue (“Every Dog Has His Day ,” March 11) was indeed disappointing. From beginning to end, it was festooned by an array of sales figures, an attempt, it seems, to validate Rodrigue’s work. The sales figures are certainly impressive but not convincing. The real value of art is not measured by money.

Comments (8)add
...
written by Charlie , March 22, 2009 - 01:48 am
Apparently you guys have tunnel vision on art. Art is much bigger than your opinion. I hope you don't rob the real meaning and value of art from your students by your opinion on it. If so we would have a boring world to live in with a one sided view on art. What value is your degree than the paper its written on. Your right that the value of art is not measured by money, but the success of it is. Surely people don't pay big money for art because its bad. I challenge you to study the art and history of George Rodrigue. Not only on the story he is saying with it but by the way he moves the brush on the canvas. If not you are both shallow minded and should not even be affiliated with art. As an artist myself, I am offended that you would think you have the right to tell me or anyone what is and isn't good art. Just because you, a professor of Art at a University and the other guy, a retired chair of Fine Arts of a high school, don't like it doesn't make it bad art. No one attacks someone who is not successful. They try to chop down at those who are successful by the jealousy of there heart. "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." Abraham Lincoln
...
written by Linda P. Kuykendall, Myrtle Beach, SC , March 22, 2009 - 07:14 pm
In light of the recent and upcoming exhibits and many wonderful events relating to all of Rodrigue's works IN CONJUNCTION WITH UL LAFAYETTE, I find it appauling that a Professor Emeritus of Art at UL could write such an article. It is a disgrace to the institution, the college, the department and most importantly to the many creative and enthusiastic art students who attend the university.
...
written by John Francis, Memphis,TN , March 22, 2009 - 10:13 pm
Obviously, Professor Russett is at odds with his colleagues at UL Lafayette, an institution that is spending a good amount of time and effort honoring Rodrigue this Spring. I guess he didn't get the memo, and I presume he didn't bother to see the incredibly impressive Rodrigue retrospective last year at the New Orleans Museum of Art. Of course we all know "the real value of art is not measured by money," so here's a tip for the clueless Professor: "the real value of of art" is NOT determined by academics and critics either - as anyone remotely familiar with art history knows.
...
written by Robert & Jolie Shelton, Lafayette, LA , March 23, 2009 - 07:43 pm
BAYING AT THE ââ?¬Å?BLUE DOGââ?¬Â MOON
The two (2) recent letters to the editor criticizing the works of George Rodrigue, together with the criticism of the March 11, 2009 article in THE INDEPENDENT WEEKLY reflects an undertone of jealousy/envy which is unworthy of the Lafayette Art Community. The reference to ââ?¬Å?petit bourgeoisââ?¬Â and ââ?¬Å?rich collectorsââ?¬Â is contemptible.
George Rodrigue�s artistic success is to be applauded. What better example of the American ideal than to succeed in one�s lifetime by scaling great heights from humble beginnings, whether in Business, Industry, Medicine, Law or the Arts.
Perhaps the letter writers should review the recent MERRELL Publication (London-New York) entitled ââ?¬Å?The Dog - 5000 years of the Dog in Artââ?¬Â, authored by Tamsin Pickeral (2008). This comprehensive survey of art relative to our beloved pets include such noted artists as Veronese, Landseer, Hunt, Van Eyck, Titian, Oudry, Rockwell, Freud, Warhol, Stubbs, Memling, Bonheur, Remington, Picasso, Carpaccio, Bassano, Courbet, Herring Sr., Velasquez, Rembrandt, and last, but not least, George Rodrigueââ?¬â?¢s Blue Dog painting entitled: ââ?¬Å?Youââ?¬â?¢re a Head of Meââ?¬Â 2007, as the final selection in the publication.
Paintings for ââ?¬Å?The Dogââ?¬Â book were chosen from the finest art in the world depicting dogs, written by an unbiased author, who had a panoply of world art from which to select.
As if being mentioned in the same breath and included in the same publication with Veronese, Titian, Rockwell, Stubbs, Memling, Courbet, Velasquez, Picasso and Rembrandt is not ââ?¬Å?VALIDATIONââ?¬Â enough, pray tell what do the letter writers require of an artist to receive the recognition, acclaim and respect that a hard working artist deserves.
The recent sale at Sotheby's, New York, on February 8, 2009, of a ââ?¬Å?Blue Dogââ?¬Â painting entitled: ââ?¬Å?I Hear the Blues, I See the Blues, I Sing the Bluesââ?¬Â sold for $170,500.00 (including premium), means that many bidders fought to get this painting, as it sold for a substantial multiple above its estimate of $30,000 - $60,000.
Make no mistake about where we stand. We are collectors of Georges� early paintings. We donated eight (8) wonderful paintings to the UL Foundation so that all Acadiana could view these paintings in an appropriate Museum atmosphere. The present display at the UL- Hilliard Museum of Art and the Acadiana Center for the Arts (ACA) are spectacular and should be seen by all of Acadiana.
We were both very proud to see major museums throughout the country holding Exhibition after Exhibition of George�s paintings to great acclaim. We feel that these Museum Exhibitions are the ultimate VALIDATION of an artist.
I would hope that this letter will cause people to reflect upon the apparent acceptability, throughout the world, of the ââ?¬Å?Art of George Rodrigueââ?¬Â, allowing the general public to reach its own decision about George Rodrigue and his art.
Robert & Jolie SheltonLafayette, LA
...
written by John Edward David Peter Malin , March 26, 2009 - 01:57 am
The late Lord Clark would agree with Professor Russett.

One can tolerate bad taste in artistic judgment; however, one cannot condone artistic boredom.

Monsieur Rodrigue's painting corpora lack symbolic power and interest.

If one enjoys Grandma Moses sort of paintings and therapy paintings, then Rodrique is your artist for the moment.

However, the canon of artistic merit, or, informed educated taste, would scoff at these productions as serious works of art. They are insular, insignificant and trite.

We remind this audience that we are a French Bourbon Royal Roman Catholic culture in Acadiana; we are not a peasant culture!
...
written by The Next Generation , March 27, 2009 - 12:21 pm
Such a valiant effort by the naysayers to be heard. Thankfully though, eventually, all critics die. At that point, their insignificant voices are silenced and never heard of again (not soon enough). But, what will remain is a body of work by an artist that has to be examined by future generations with fresh eyes and no prejudices. When you tear down all of the layers of politics and jealousy all that they will have to look at is the artist himself and his actual paintings. They will see a man who succeeded against all odds to actually contribute to our society by creating works that truly offered a history of his people and culture. How many other boys from small town 1950's Louisiana could have even imagined a career as an artist? Much less, how many could have actually succeeded in accomplishing what they sought out to do? It is easy for the contemporaries to look back and say that the artist made the obvious choices and that is why he is popular. But, it is the younger generations that can see that what the artist did was not easy. It was not simple. He went against the grain in every aspect possible and still came out on top because of his skill, vision, and dedication. Those facts can never be taken away. All of this has happened because of one man's foresight and genius. History will be able to place his oeuvre in its proper exalted context and judge it for its uniqueness and improbability. That is what the museums across the country and in Lafayette are celebrating now. And, that is why, it is the artist who will be remembered forever while the pompous critic's misinformed and petty views fade off into oblivion.
...
written by John Edward David Peter Malin , March 27, 2009 - 09:15 pm
Next Generation:

You have woven a delightful story book tale of "success" against the presumably great odds. Or, what we say in economics: "low probability event, high impact."

Do you think art & culture critics do not read historical, artistic biographies? Most critics are well versed in Giorgio Vasari's (1511-1574) "Lives of the Artists."

Most of your argument does not apply to Monsieur Rodrigue. He is highly commercially successful. He even has a wonderful focal-local Resturant in Lafayette, which one simply must be seen at, if one is to be taken seriously in our local business tribe.

If what you assert is true, namely, that he had a horrible early beginning in life, then all of us have our humanity enlarged by learning of his personal biographical narrative.

It is inhuman and beastial to deny success to a great success as Monsieur R. presently is. One wishes more wealth for him as he matures and grows older !

You raise a false choice when you assert that contemporary critics do not blur with future critics. Critical judgment, unlike judgmental opinion, holds fairly constantly in the historical record.

Much of what you allude to applies to "great" artists unrecognized in their age; Monsieur R. is well recognized and appropriately compensated.

Lastly, you confirmed my statement that it is not one's reaction, nor one's biography that is important; it is the actual artistic work production !

I want to thank you for your delicate and tender background information.

--
...
written by The Next Generation , March 30, 2009 - 11:06 pm
John Edward David Peter Malin:

I appreciate your economics lesson. But, why don't we journey into a little statistics. You sure do have a hard time grappling with the concept of an artist having commercial and economic success. But, since when does an artist have to be starving and unrecognized during his lifetime in order to be considered great? For an artist, being skilled at his craft and having popularity are by no means mutually exclusive. But, what popularity does do is prevent individuals like yourself, who only gain pleasure in tearing down the actual accomplishments of others, from truly examining a person's artistic output in order to put in into its historical context. As of now, your comments only serve to show your ignorance of the artist's education and career. You act as if he is some provincial folk painter who just stumbled onto a successful concept by luck. You completely ignore his classical art training and his knowledge of art history. Why don't you step outside of your glass house some day and actually go and look at a career retrospective of Mr. Rodrigue. Or, even attend a lecture by the artist himself. I am sure you would try your hardest to hate it and find it disgusting. But, you may actually learn something if you bothered to look at actual original paintings spanning a 40 year evolution and learn the concepts behind them. You can get back with me when you have an appreciation for abstraction, regionalism, pop art, hard-edge painting, repetitive imagery, and the history of Louisiana and its artists.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it