READER IDUN ON THE WONDERFUL BOMBERG AND AUERBACH AND WHY THE HELL, US CRITICS, TALK WITHOUT BEING ARTISTS:
‘As an artist myself, I feel I ought to reply to this as Auerbach is an artist that really resonates with me – he is a very honest painter who captures the spirit or essence of his subject in every piece.
As I didn’t read the Chilver article on Auerbach’s show and his making a comparison with David Bomberg, taking this further is a little difficult. Having said that, as far as I know, Auerbach was taught by Bomberg, so it’s to be expected that Bomberg’s style of painting rubbed off on Auerbach. They are both great artists, and really, does it matter who’s better than the other ?
There are so may art-critics out there, who are not painters themselves, who are up their own arse. They piss me off, hugely. How the hell do they know how the artist was feeling when he was painting ? And not just that, but also what came across from the sitter or indeed cityscape/landscape (in Auerbach’s case) on any given day. There are so many things that will influence how a painting is executed. Conclusion; Send all art critics to a remote island where they can talk about their self importance. As Auerbach paints every day he is probably oblivious to all his reviews, good or bad, in which case, good for him.’