I plan on doing some kind of recap of Labor Day weekend (maybe), but I wanted to post this neato portrait done by an artist in Great Britain.
When I first saw this portrait -- before reading the story behind it (pun intended) -- I thought it was quite a fetching likeness of the President.
He is depicted gazing stoically into the future, ready to do what is necessary to ensure the continuance of life, liberty and the Amercan way. I'm pretty sure that's was Republican supporters in Texas thought, too. Until they read the story behind the portrait.
US Republicans are none too pleased with Brit artist Jonathan Yeo, who's just completed a fetching portrait of George Bush constructed from grumble mag clippings...That's right, look closely at the collage images and you can see (if you want) women and men in various stages of undress performing various acts upon each other.
According to the Sun, Republicans have reacted with predictable indignation. A spokesman for Republicans Abroad International said: "This will cause outrage in America. Some people will think it’s funny - but personally I think it is a cheap stunt."
A spokesman for the Texas tentacle of the Republican Party chipped in with: "This picture is very distasteful. Why would anyone want to make a picture of our President from pornographic material?"
Not sure what the artist's message is. The President is a boob? Something about being the "head" of state? Dick (Cheney, of course) is on the president's mind?
According to the artist:
"I did it for fun, not to offend, but I'm pleased with it. I did it to amuse."Still, it's a pretty good portrait. It raises a few questions: What is the intrinsic value of the medium. Does the medium increase/decrease the aesthetic value of a work? Is that what I think it is on his earlobe?
tagged: Bush, art, portrait, porn, Jonathan Yeo