art
columns
- Spain's Greatest Living Painter
The haunting Realism of Antonio López García.
Christopher Benfey
posted April 30, 2008 - The New Emperor of No-Brow
Is Takashi Murakami Japan's Andy Warhol—or its Walt Disney?
Mia Fineman
posted April 16, 2008 - Lucian Freud, Unbuttoned
Freud's grandson tells all.
Christopher Benfey
posted April 2, 2008 - Seven Mysteries of China
Is porcelain addictive?
Christopher Benfey
posted April 2, 2008 - When Frank Stella Met Benjamin Moore
The art you can make with paint from a can.
Mia Fineman
posted March 19, 2008 - Search for more art articles
- Subscribe to the art RSS feed
- View our complete art archive
Talk of the TownCritics love the painter John Currin. But why?
By Mia FinemanPosted Tuesday, Dec. 30, 2003, at 3:07 PM ET
(Click here to see the slide show of Currin's work.)

Almost every art season, there's one show courageous, compelling, or contentious enough to get everybody talking—like "Sensation," the controversial exhibition of Young British Artists at the Brooklyn Museum, or the Guggenheim's populist resurrection of Norman Rockwell. This year, the name on everybody's lips is John Currin, whose midcareer retrospective recently arrived at the Whitney Museum. By now, the major critics have weighed in on Currin's slyly satirical, figurative paintings, and the reviews have been unusually enthusiastic. There are some wildly different ideas about exactly what Currin is up to—New York Times critic Michael Kimmelman sees him as "a latter-day Jeff Koons" trafficking in postmodern irony while Peter Schjeldahl at The New Yorker finds him a blissfully sincere artist tapping into the timeless values of "mystery, sublimity, transcendence." But everyone is unanimous about one thing: John Currin can paint.
In almost every review, Currin's technical skill is acknowledged with a kind of breathless wonder. And to be sure, lately he has adopted a suave, Old Master-ish style, rendering the smooth, luminous skin of his nudes with real conviction—a marked departure from the intentionally crude technique of his earlier paintings. But this critical fixation on Currin's painterly technique raises the question: Why are we so surprised that a successful contemporary painter is good at putting pigment on canvas?
(Click here to see a slide show and for further exploration of Currin's work.)
feedback | about us | help | advertise | newsletters | mobile
User Agreement and Privacy Policy | All rights reserved
- Today's Headlines
- [audio] Rubik's Cube Solved With Hammer
Mon, 12 May 2008 01:00:36 -0400 - Optimism Can't Beat Cancer
Mon, 12 May 2008 01:00:33 -0400 - Undercover Fireman Infiltrates Three-Alarm Blaze
Mon, 12 May 2008 01:00:03 -0400 - » More from the Onion
- Today's Opinions
- McCain's Christian Problem
Mon, 12 May 2008 00:00:00 EDT - In Burma, a U.N. Promise Not Kept
Mon, 12 May 2008 00:00:00 EDT - Priority: Statehood
Mon, 12 May 2008 00:00:00 EDT - » More from washingtonpost.com
- Today's Headlines
- Sit Back, Relax, Get Ready to Rumble
Sat, 10 May 2008 19:51:32 GMT - Shimon Peres: ‘Practically All of Us Were Hawks’
Sat, 10 May 2008 19:57:28 GMT - Newt Gingrich: Dear Senator Obama …
Sat, 10 May 2008 17:58:20 GMT - » More from Newsweek
- Today's Headlines
- The Last Hug
Fri, 9 May 2008 20:03:50 GMT - Grounded: Conversations on The Root
Wed, 7 May 2008 18:55:35 GMT - Viva Vogue Italia!
Thu, 8 May 2008 18:17:41 GMT - » More from The Root

art









