An interesting exhibition the Infinite jest is at the Metropolitan museum. The review by Johnson describes the art of caricature, which he states as when artists make fun of other people. The artists do so through “features of the human body that most distinguish one from another: noses, eyes, mouths, chins, teeth, torsos and extremities.” In the review Johnson first describes the art of caricature but then points out the negatives of caricature. He says that as time passes it is harder to understand the caricature. Johnson explains as time goes on the paintings require more verbal explanations to enjoy its humorous deformations.
He points out the painting of Samuel Hieronymus Grimm, which display a boy and his father. In the painting the boy has an enormous wig and requires a sword to tip his hat. It is harder to understand this because such wigs as these went out of fashion a long time ago and wouldn’t be as humorous to someone during that time period than to people of the 21st century.
Although the reviewer Johnson points out the faults of the exhibition, he believes that the exhibition is a good one and worth checking out. Johnson thinks that, because the job of the caricature artist is to draw realistic yet exaggerated paintings, they are very skilled artists. He states in the last line of the review, “The art of contemporary caricature in all its scabrous glory is as alive today as it ever was. It cries out for a show of its own.” And I agree with him. These painting that mock political and social behaviors of society would be a wonderful exhibition to check out.
This is an interesting point because I relate caricatures to political cartoons in a way. Even though political cartoons are more serious, both methods are mediums used to poke fun at certain people or topics. However, the issue of understanding caricatures is that they are based on current events, so as time progresses they become less relevant. For example, a caricature of Charlie Sheen would’ve involved a rock star from mars and tigers, among other things, but in a few years that wont be relevant at all.
I agree with Johnson that as time passes it is harder to understand the underlying meaning of the humor behind it all, as we live in a different time period, but I found Grimm’s painting amusing. I thought the large wig and the exaggerated surprised expression was humorous when I first saw it.
I don’t think that the amount of time that has elapsed has been so great in order to understand these humoristic photos. I do believe that as more time goes on we will lose the basic knowledge to find these paintings humorous but for now I found that the painting with the over-sized hair due was pretty humorous without any sort of explanation.
I agree with Sion because yes, some of the features that existed in the past are rare now, but i think that makes it more humorous especially in the case with the giant hair.
Also I also make the reference of caricatures to political cartoons and think they are an effective way of bringing up political and social points.
Hi Ngawang! I agree that this kind of art is humorous and entertaining, even when we don’t understand the meaning behind it in some cases. Like Sharon, I thought the image was funny even if I didn’t understand all of the meaning behind it due to the different time period. However, I do think that it is unfortunate that the true meaning and motivation behind some of these works may not be communicated as easily as it once was.