Colescott, Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder

Colescott, Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder Robert Colescott, Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder, 1979 (Portland Art Museum) Speakers: Dr. Beth Harris, Steven Zucker

Back

Colescott, Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder

⇐ Use this menu to view and help create subtitles for this video in many different languages. You'll probably want to hide YouTube's captions if using these subtitles.

This is Steven Zucker with Beth Harris and we are at the Portland Art Museum and we're looking at Robert Colscott's 1979 painting "Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder".
And so we see the artist I presume looking very artisty and pants covered in paint and slippers in his studio and he's sitting in front of a copy that he's done it looks like the Matisse painting of the dance.
But he's not, he's (he's not looking at it) the painting.
No, and there's a model behind him and she looks like she's disrobing or getting dressed
Wait, hold on for just a moment (Alright) because there's so many layers of reference here (yes, there are). It's just enormously complicated because we assume that she's a model because she's either dressing or disrobing, and um she's in the artist's studio so of course i mean, if, one thing's about (well) the studio by Corbet for instance, right?
(Yeah), but on the other hand, there's something sort of very racy about the way she's been represented.
(Well, and, yea but artist's models sort of have that reputation right, I mean, going back. You couldn't easily go and ask your mother and her friends to undress for you so, you know you have to get a woman of a lower class who would need the money)
Ok, fair enough, but that's contrast to the actual, or I shouldn't say actual but the muse that is being represented by Matisse.
So, that's the allowable nudity as opposed to something that is far more less comfortable, and maybe even less comfortable because of the race issues here in American tradition, right?
Of a white woman and a black man. (Right) And I think that's something that's clearly being (But that's just occurred to me that this is a take on Sirhat's painting of the models).
The posers, where he's got the grown jaht in his studio and he's got the models dressing.
And actually I think they're putting on their stockings, and her stockings are so obvious here.
So what does it mean to create a painting in 1979 that is a kind of- that just references um, like mad, the history of art?
And what does it mean to look at a painting like this with or without that art historical knowledge?
How does, I mean, does this- it's a very sort of wonderfully straightforward canvas um, in a way it's painted in a very direct kind of manner.
and beautiful and is there's a sense of openness to the way that it's referenced and it is also playful in the way that it's painted.
And yet, it's also presuming this really deep knowldege of our history.
Yeah, but I'm wondering how much you need of it, an African- American artist there, I mean I think there's a sort of enough culture to sort of get this even without that art history
We all know that most of the people who are in Jansen's history of art are white men, you know, and that until very recently, they didn't include stuff from other cultures or works by women and then you have this African- American artist who, are prominent in the center, turning away, from Matisse,
and also how do you read this gesture, and the woman looks like a hooker.
I think there's enough here that there's you sorta get it out of all the art history books.
What do you think about his gesture, that's the puzzle to me.
I think, he is looking at us almost as if he's discerining or critiquing our view. Our gaze, and I think that's really fascinating.
And because the title is "Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder" and he's looking at us and we're beholding him, but we're also looking at the woman who, is looks kind of racy. And we're also looking at this icon of the Western canon.
Not to mention...
So what do we find beautiful? Where does beauty lie, why do we hold beauty in certain places and not in others
And perhaps he is even art historically referencing somehow an impediment to, in a sense the capturing of beauty, or is it some way focusing or distilling that beauty.
In other words, does it help or hinder?
In a sense all of the references to art history. I mean I am looking at Jasper Johns, its just the painting is completely full
of art historical references.
And of course it's a long tradition of artists in their studio.

( total)

Discuss the site

For general discussions about Khan Academy, visit our Reddit discussion page.

Flag inappropriate posts

Here are posts to avoid making. If you do encounter them, flag them for attention from our Guardians.

abuse

disrespectful or offensive
an advertisement

not helpful

low quality
not about the video topic
soliciting votes or seeking badges
a homework question
a duplicate answer
repeatedly making the same post

wrong category

a tip or feedback in Questions
a question in Tips & Feedback
an answer that should be its own question

about the site

a question about Khan Academy
(Visit our FAQ)
a post about badges
a technical problem with the site
(Report a problem)
a request for videos or features

Postmodernism

Colescott, Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder Robert Colescott, Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder, 1979 (Portland Art Museum) Speakers: Dr. Beth Harris, Steven Zucker

Colescott, Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder

Be specific, and indicate a time in the video:

Have something that's not a question about this content?

This discussion area is not meant for answering homework questions.

( total)

Share a tip

Suggest a fix

Have something that's not a tip or feedback about this content?

This discussion area is not meant for answering homework questions.