|
Post by JoJo on Sept 25, 2005 15:46:55 GMT -5
Can't resist posting this story of course. ART CRITICS RECONSIDER 'McCARTNEY IS DEAD' MYTH
New York's top art critics are refuelling the rock 'n' roll myth that PAUL McCARTNEY died over three decades ago - after taking a rare close-up view of his paintings.
Top Big Apple celebrity art expert BAIRD JONES staged a one-night exhibition of JOHN LENNON and McCartney art from his own personal collection at New York club Deep earlier this month (15SEP05) and was left stunned by the reactions of his "austere" friends.
A fan of McCartney's art for years, Jones admits it took the opinions of his critical pals to make him realise that the 'Paul is dead' rumours that started in the late 1960s could be true.
He explains, "There were lots of questions about why he (McCartney) predominantly uses the colour red in ways one would not. It's the colour of blood and death.
"The critics were asking questions like, 'Why is there so much red in the garden (painting) and on the beach (painting)? It's macabre.' Call it art psychoanalysis, but the 'Paul is dead' rumour has started to spread.
"These were highbrow, austere people who take their art seriously. Some had never really had the chance to see McCartney's art up close."
Jones now claims there are major clues in McCartney's art that suggest the rocker might not be what he seems to be.
He explains, "It's one more sign that this man is communicating something. Red has been a dominant colour of his for some time.
"It might be evidence that the Paul McCartney we think we know is not Paul McCartney; he's an imposter - and here's a signal."
25/09/2005 10:55tinyurl.com/b9a7h
|
|
|
Post by ReallyReallyDead on Sept 25, 2005 16:02:44 GMT -5
It's just the color red, people!
|
|
|
Post by Jai Guru Deva on Sept 25, 2005 16:32:21 GMT -5
Wow, this is a fascinating piece--that artists would seriously start to consider PID when looking at Billy's paintings. Quite a bit of metaphor is used in art, whether it's in a realist work or an abstract form. From the use colors and shapes, to use of symbols and human expression. The media really is a window to one's soul.
When I look back on the life of Paul, I don't see anything which indicates he had a profound interest in art. Of all the Beatles, it was John who attended the art institute in Liverpool, while George and Paul went to the grammer school. It wasn't until January 1967, with the purchase of a Magritte, do we see any interest in art from "Paul"...
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Sept 25, 2005 17:26:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by -Wings- on Sept 25, 2005 18:13:21 GMT -5
I have to laugh that art critics are starting to consider this through his paintings, just because as an aspiring writer it first hit me when I examined the lyrics and words and realized that nearly 25% of their songs post '66 dealt with it. To each his own.
|
|
|
Post by JoJo on Sept 25, 2005 19:48:29 GMT -5
What's surprising is not so much that they comment on his frequent use of reds, but that they jump straight to PID without perhaps finding some other possibe explanation. S.O.P. is usually to dance around, or say anything other than that.
It's odd in a "what's wrong with this picture" sorta way IMO.
|
|
|
Post by DarkHorse on Sept 25, 2005 21:24:44 GMT -5
Don't underestimate the ability of some people to 'see' into the psyches of other by viewing their art. As a matter of fact, some people make a profession out of this. I have a friend who is an art therapist and she could tell you some pretty in depth things about you just by viewing your art. It's really quite amazing.
And obviously, Paul's death is still much on Bill's mind.
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Sept 26, 2005 2:14:15 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing JoJo.. interesting indeed. I'll get around to scanning his art book soon.. you never know what you might find
|
|
|
Post by beatlies on Sept 26, 2005 2:25:07 GMT -5
The cover of Faul's new album is a red background with yellow lettering; his uniform sashes on the Sgt. Pepper cover are red. The Sgt. Pepper sleeve chevrons are yellow with red borders. The color motif of red and yellow has come up in clue discussions on the other forum. Red is the color of British military uniforms. Red could be an insider "wink" as to Faul's being employed as a military intelligence agent.
|
|
|
Post by pennylane on Sept 26, 2005 2:31:11 GMT -5
cloak and dagger
|
|
|
Post by jerriwillmore on Sept 27, 2005 15:48:27 GMT -5
Might just be his favorite color, people.
Mine is purple. :^)
|
|
|
Post by FAUllibLE on Feb 13, 2008 16:07:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by MikeNL on Feb 13, 2008 16:13:22 GMT -5
don't see much of the red there?
|
|
|
Post by FAUllibLE on Feb 13, 2008 16:21:05 GMT -5
Pink is really a light red. Theres no word for light blue or light yellow. theres alot of light red ;D
|
|
|
Post by B on Feb 13, 2008 18:40:30 GMT -5
JoJo wrote: "ART CRITICS RECONSIDER 'McCARTNEY IS DEAD' MYTH ....Jones now claims there are major clues in McCartney's art that suggest the rocker might not be what he seems to be. "pennylane wrote: "I'll get around to scanning his art book soon. you never know what you might find. " --------- Man, that is some ugly art, but intriguing none-the-less. Here is some of what I see. No comment on the top picture, other than that it is full of small faces and scenarios that, no doubt, have significance. But as for the pictures that faullible posted: I believe this is symbolically Paul locked away in the mental institution. The windows at the top of the blue wall, as you would have in a facility where there would be need for windows that could not be used for escape. In the eyes of the person there are a heart and a bat. This person has love for others, but "has bats in the belfry" as the old expression goes. This is "Mr. Bellamy". "I tell you man, he's living there still." Or was at some point. At the bottom of the painting, the brown area, is a cliff and mountainside; probably the Rock of Gibraltar. I think that they may have initially had a funeral for him there, whether he was actually dead or just no longer "among the living" so to speak. George Washington ----------------------------------- No comment on picture #3 --------------------------------------- The first thing that jumps right out at me is the brown strip of dirt on the bottom. Where have we seen that before? On the Klaatu album cover where the plant roots spell out "Beatles"! What this picture represents to me is the world pre and post enlightenment. The tree(?) is the dividing line. Note the sunny yellow (as opposed to the love-y pink) light, in the 'enlightened' side of the picture. Also the man with lightbulbs all over him, as portrayed rather humorously here, as he was on the cover of a Pink Floyd album as well. The 'enlightened' human. Under the sun, with the ram's horns also suggesting the sun. Symbolically, we (humanity) about to transform from an unenlightened, but loved by God, state, to one of spiritual awareness. A man, Faul, (the green guy) hiding behind a mask, being guided by a spirit (the grey guy). The painting is called "ancient connections" from what I can gather, so the spirit may be himself in a previous incarnation. "Spirits of Ancient Egypt". Ramses I perhaps. ---------------------------------------------------- beach towels picture (no comment) So yeah, these are painted by Faul, not Paul! ;D
|
|
Jude
Hard Day's Night
Acting Naturally
Posts: 34
|
Post by Jude on Feb 15, 2008 12:03:57 GMT -5
Letter B, how can you call the art ugly and then try to interpret the "meanings" of each one? It just doesn't make sense....it would take someone who appreciates Paul's artwork to truly interpret their meaning, otherwise the interpretation is weak. In my opinion, these are beautiful paintings. There's nothing "ugly" about abstract expression.
|
|
|
Post by B on Feb 15, 2008 12:18:48 GMT -5
Beauty (and ugly) is in the eye of the beholder. They may be 'good' abstract art, but I find them ugly. The one at the top of the thread is quite skillful, but I wouldn't hang it on my wall. As for interpreting them: what he paints is an expression of his thoughts, so the interpretation is open to anyone viewing it. When I think "What is this about?" what I've written is what my mind comes up with. I don't claim to be a professional art critic, so you won't see me making statements about how "VanGogh-esque" his paintings are. I don't have a background for that, but I have no hesitation trying to analyze what's in his head.
|
|
|
Post by FAUllibLE on Feb 15, 2008 12:59:55 GMT -5
and hey these things are probably chaulked full of clues! notice how the ram sits on his own piece of dirt and hey theres 19 blue dots on the mans jacket and six segments on each of the rams horns= 1966 LoL ;D
|
|
|
Post by B on Feb 15, 2008 18:45:01 GMT -5
I wrote: "...you won't see me making statements about how 'VanGogh-esque' his paintings are."Sometimes I hit the target without even trying! ;D
|
|
|
Post by plastic paul on Feb 17, 2008 10:09:30 GMT -5
and hey these things are probably chaulked full of clues! notice how the ram sits on his own piece of dirt and hey theres 19 blue dots on the mans jacket and six segments on each of the rams horns= 1966 LoL ;D That, my friend, is well noticed. It's central to the piece that might well be genuinely what he was trying to represent.
|
|
|
Post by FAUllibLE on May 6, 2008 19:08:00 GMT -5
Even though theres no red in it, I thought I'd post this here. I think thats Paul in the background and Bill in the foreground. Not sure what it says in the puddle.
|
|
|
Post by George Spiggott on May 6, 2008 19:57:07 GMT -5
Even though theres no red in it, I thought I'd post this here. I think thats Paul in the background and Bill in the foreground. Not sure what it says in the puddle. Looks like it says "charming!"., it's a bit long for "cheers". Maybe this doodle's a reference to the shoes thing, nice 'wonky eye' dig thrown in there too.
|
|
|
Post by B on May 6, 2008 20:13:50 GMT -5
What's in the cloud (puddle) seems to be the "cCartney" part of McCartney, with, possibly, the "M" being the edges of the cloud. What seems to be being represented is that the unshaven, unkempt McCartney in the front is picturing himself as an angel on a cloud, with radiant energy. Imagining himself as "Superman" while, in fact, being a wreck. Or, more likely, if this is a Faul drawing (and I think it is), a representation of himself being guided by the spirit of his previous incarnation as an Egyptian king. A cartoonish version of the picture on the right.
|
|
|
Post by George Spiggott on May 7, 2008 10:53:56 GMT -5
Now you come to mention it LB, I can see a potential 3rd eye reference going on with the Bill caricature., & also what seems to be a face contained within it(?), which appears clearer when the image is slightly blurred.
|
|
|
Post by FAUllibLE on May 7, 2008 21:37:04 GMT -5
This one might hold a clue.
|
|