As an English Literature, History of Art, and Art student rapidly approaching incoming exams, I find opportunities to exercise technical language everywhere (I would advise for the months April to June to not explore central London with me to save yourself from an earful of classical architectural features). Therefore, and yes, admittedly, this could be very obviously a procrastination of revision, I would like to present a studious analysis of the childhood literary and artistic creations of members of our very own school. What a clever bunch we are.
‘WANTED!’ (2011, pencil and ink on paper)
This work is written in an adaptation of Early Modern English which, when translated by experts, reads: ‘WANTED! One naughty circle stole Miss Witherby’s glue sticks. P.S. He can squirt lava in your face. He has one side and no corners.’ Accompanying this rich Shakespearean prose is a visualisation of said circle. The artist uses a vibrant red, set off by the complementary green border, connoting blood and danger. His eyebrows contort in vicious anger and his mouth is morphed into a zig-zagged, fanged scowl. This is not your average naughty circle. And, in each hand, he arrogantly flaunts his prize, daring anyone to challenge him. The stolen ‘gloo sdicks’.
‘It’ (2011, pencil on paper)
A Polish folklore creature extends its monstrous white neck, its ‘big fat tomy’ looming over the viewer threateningly. An open mouth grins: a smile or a sneer?. The artist reveals that this unnamed figure, referred to only as ‘it’, ‘lik to hide in flowers’: a sign of a sweet childish spirit or a deadly form of disguise? This sense of mystery is continued in the poetic heading: ‘I love it so much. Keil him.’, presenting a conflicted, unreliable narrator. All aspects of this work are infused with a masterful sense of ambiguity, leaving the viewer unsettled and perturbed.
‘Pig and Owner’ (2013, pen and ink on paper)
Really the Charlotte’s Web of its time. Here, we see a six-legged pig and its green owner (handily labelled for the viewer who may not immediately gauge their species just by looking at them) standing beside one another. However, there is a sense of distance between them, with their hands (or claws?) reaching out to each other yet not touching, the owner almost drifting away. Moving, really. Naturalism is abandoned, with the green of the owner reminiscent of Paul Gaugin’s Green Christ. The divine halo on the owner (im guessing produced by the artist accidentally picking up the yellow pen instead of the green one) continues the religious imagery, likening him to traditional depictions of Christ by the old masters. Rich in emotion, this strange farmyard scene speaks to something much deeper.
‘A Portrait of Our Queen’ (2012, watercolour and collage on paper)
Completed for her Majesty’s Diamond Jubilee in 2012, this multi-media work captures the late monarch in all her unsettling glory. By subverting conventional expectations of anatomical accuracy, as seen in the morbidly extended central section of the face and tic tac appearance of the teeth, a greater focus is placed on character and expression. She looks off to the side with a cheeky glint in her eye, which in an accidentally violent touch seems to be bleeding? Representative of the sacrifice she makes for our country? Rip Queen Lizzie, you would have hated this. Charles, watch out- I’m coming for you next.
‘Modern Britain’ (2012, acrylic on paper)
A child’s experiment with paint or a biting critique of our country? A single eye looks out from a wasteland of scalding pink. In place of the pupil, is a book (?); in place of the iris is plastered the union jack. From a grotesquely enlarged tear duct, falls the evidence of sorrow. Behind the joyful facade of the Olympics and aforementioned Diamond Jubilee, our country is weeping. ( I know this was definitely not the artist’s six year-old intention when creating this, but the more I look at it the more I am convinced it must be a political commentary of some kind. Election poster? Handouts for a class 1W secret alliance meeting? Cult propaganda? There is definitely something going on…)
‘Self Portrait in Charcoal’ (2013, charcoal on paper)
In this piece, the artist deeply explores their own character. Any background is removed, making the face, placed close to the viewer, the sole focus of the composition. The artist pays close attention to their own individual features, including their uniquely rectangular nose and highly placed eyes. Nice micro bangs, too. A hauntingly wide smile cuts across the face, beaming from cheek to cheek. (beat that, Mona Lisa). Indeed, the influence of Leonardo is evident in the hazy, blended finish of the charcoal. However, this work clearly surpasses his in both emotional expression and technical finish.
‘The Whale (For Mummy)’
Years before the Oscar winning film of the same name, this poem almost aggressively promotes body positivity. Words that have since been struck from Roald Dahl’s books are used here with glee to describe the whale’s physique. An ABCB rhyme scheme is maintained throughout the poem, conveying a sense of insistence that is emphasised by the poet’s impressive turnout of around ten different synonyms for the word ‘fat’. This poem about accepting obesity is lovingly labelled ‘for mummy’. (Can’t imagine she was best pleased by this).
‘A Bull For Mum’ (2014, colour pencil on paper)
Seems to be a theme here. Poor Godolphin mothers. A whale and now a bull. Certainly not the most flattering art to find out you were the muse behind.
And so concludes this critical investigation into our childhood creations.
Xoxo
Unpublished
Kommentare