Portraits of a politician

Two commissioned portraits of Tony Blair have been unveiled recently, one by Jonathan Yeo and one by Phil Hale.

Yeo had already made one in 2001.

https://img113.imageshack.us/img113/...yeo2001gx2.jpg
Yeo, 2001


This year Blair sat for him again and this is the result.

https://img113.imageshack.us/img113/...yeo2008np5.jpg
Yeo, 2008


Last year Phil Hale began painting Blair and with all due respect I feel he captured the man far, far better than the Yeo's which seem to capture only the image.

https://img113.imageshack.us/img113/...ale2007gi2.jpg
Hale, 2007

Gah, I think Britain would rather forget that face.

Those are awful. They make him look so slimy and old. Blair should be remembered for his upbeat nature and decency. Those highlight neither of those things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

Those are awful. They make him look so slimy and old. Blair should be remembered for his upbeat nature and decency. Those highlight neither of those things.

---

:inquisitive:

What was decent about pretending to be Protestant just to become PM then converting back to Catholicism as soon as he left? Obviously he should'nt have had to do that, but I know if the situation was vice-versa I would never change my religion for a position of political power.

Although thats not even going into his policies.

Politicians should have better things to do anyway than sitting getting painted and trying to steal a page in the history books.

His Thatcherite hijacking of the Labour party has left British politics in a very dire situation.

Just on a technical/aesthetic level, the Hale painting is far superior to the two Yaos. As for Mr. Blair's legacy and significance, I'll shut the hell up like a good colonial.

Wow, I never anticipated such partisan reactions. Just wow.

Caledonian, I guess Blair's place in the history books was assured prior to the commissioning of any portraits.

You could go on protesting 'oh my, look what he's done to Britain', but I think the Hale portrait also shows what Britain, power and deception have done to Tony Blair. It's as if the different traits are vying for emphasis, the bitter, almost resigned angle of the mouth and chin, the overt scepticism in the eyes, the hint of anger, even smoldering hysteria in the brow.

Lol, sorry to barge in with a rant, but this is the backroom after all...

As for the art, I like Hale's. It's very, um, atmospheric?

I'm not one of the more artistically inclined, so you'll need to forgive me.

But doesn't his head look very big in that last one? OK his hairs retreated by that point but even at the sides...:inquisitive:

I love Hale's painting as a painting - not entirely sure its got a likeness though, I think he's rather improved Blair, he looks more like some elite Shakespearian actor than a tired politician.

Interestingly I like your crop of it more that the full painting which is a bit more conventional in composition. See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7363847.stm


Can't stand Yeo's :sad2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Makanyane

Interestingly I like your crop of it more that the full painting which is a bit more conventional in composition. See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7363847.stm

---

Darn! You just can't trust that pinko Guardian in anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Makanyane

I love Hale's painting as a painting - not entirely sure its got a likeness though, I think he's rather improved Blair, he looks more like some elite Shakespearian actor than a tired politician.

---

Then again many politicians are accomplished actors, I mean in the proper sense, not the derogatory one. They are obliged (by us!) to act in accordance with the rules and pomp of office, with the hopes and aspirations of the electorate, those of the people closest to them, heck, even with their own expectations of themselves. I'll bet that most of the time they themselves couldn't tell if they were acting. Besides, Blair will go down in history as being particularly gifted in this department. So I think Hale wasn't all wrong to suggest this aspect.

As with the trademark white shirt with open collar - it used to suggest energy, now it does the opposite. The face is dynamic enough, it's the neck that makes it old.

I could think of a myriad things Blair did wrong, but I think this painting first and foremost reflects what we do to politicians. We elect them to do some very dirty work for us, we expect them to lie and manipulate, intimidate, look relaxed on the scene as well as maintain total control behind it, and in the end we condemn them for it and want their faces scrapped from our memory. That takes its toll on any man or woman.

It couldn't have been said better. Nor could someone get closer to the truth.

:bow:

That is true. I really like Tony Blair and like what he's done with the U.K.

What would I know.

Plus - he was never Catholic, he just converted after his term was over. It isn't a far leap from High Church Anglicanism.

The entire premise of Anglicanism was to break off from the Church so that Henry could have more power, control church lands more exclusively and divorce his wives. There is no real reason to be a High Church Anglican and not switch to RC - especially if you find the Pope to be a good guy.
The separate Catholic "rites" ensure that the English tradition will be maintained, just as the others have.
Does anyone have a better reason why Henry broke from Rome? I see the other break offs, but that one was purely cynical.

Don't answer me here, make another thread or PM me - i don't want to hijack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caledonian Rhyfelwyr

What was decent about pretending to be Protestant just to become PM then converting back to Catholicism as soon as he left? Obviously he should'nt have had to do that, but I know if the situation was vice-versa I would never change my religion for a position of political power.

---

Paris vaut bien une messe :yes:

Quote:

---

They make him look so slimy and old.

---

But he is slimey and old :shrug:

Quote:

---

I think the Hale portrait also shows what Britain, power and deception have done to Tony Blair.

---

I wonder if there were portraits done of Bush to match these in the same timescale would they show the same burden etched on the face of the man , or is Bush just too stupid to realise what he has done .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

I wonder if there were portraits done of Bush to match these in the same timescale would they show the same burden etched on the face of the man , or is Bush just too stupid to realise what he has done .

---

I've been briefly looking around the Web but all I could find were lots of amateur portraits, nothing 'official' or commissioned by the Bush family. And lots of photographs, but I guess that's not what we're looking for.

Anyway, what did you mean by stupid? :stunned:

.
I laughed the last remnants of my brains on that video! :laugh4:
.

Is it me as does the Hale painting make Blair look a lot like Emperor Palpatine?

First two really represent him as he wanted to seem, then and now. Third one is how I imagine Blair when the cameras are off.

Well, I wouldn't expect him to put the third one up in his living room.

On the first he looks a bit...childish, naive maybe? Second and third I both like although in the third his forehead looks too big IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Just on a technical/aesthetic level, the Hale painting is far superior to the two Yaos.

---

I agree.

Quote:

---

As for Mr. Blair's legacy and significance, I'll shut the hell up like a good colonial.

---

Good lad. ~:pat:

Quote:

---

They make him look so slimy and old.

---

Go wash your mouth out with carbolic soap this instant!

Come back Tone mate, all is forgiven! :laugh4:

Yes but are they art?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

in the third his forehead looks too big IMO.

---

At least someone agrees with me.

This is the Guardian cartoonist's take:


https://img175.imageshack.us/img175/...ell2008fp8.jpg
Steve Bell 2008