Alex Colville Child and Dog (1952)

- L.M. 12-06-2007 9:35 pm

no killing allowed today.
- sally mckay 12-06-2007 11:11 pm

are you thinking of changing Bat-Boy's name to Krampus?
- sally mckay 12-06-2007 11:14 pm

He hasn't tried to eat a baby in almost two months. (though that doesn't mean I'll drop my guard)

I was always so entranced by the limbs and feet on this Colville dog that I never noticed the psycho look on his face. This painting beats all of Landseer's dogs.
- L.M. 12-07-2007 12:10 am

I remember seeing this documentary on Colville on TV when I was a kid. There was one part where they were talking about his methodical and mathematical approach to making compositions - and his wife was quoted as saying something like "and I'll come downstairs and he will be measuring the dog."
- C.R. (guest) 12-07-2007 12:37 am

There's something horrible about this painting. I think it's the floor - wall - dog relationship. None of the three seem like they are in the same space. Throw in a innocent toddler / dog-toy and it's a death dreamscape like no other.
- joester (guest) 12-07-2007 3:13 am

That's because the dog and the toddler aren't casting any shadows at all. (it took me a while to figure out why they appeared weightless)
- L.M. 12-07-2007 6:28 am

shadows are for sissies. I think the toddler can take the dog.
- sally mckay 12-07-2007 7:21 am

this painting always reminds me of balthus, and i think tis because the formal skill is used not for versmillitude but something stranger and more sinister

- anthony (guest) 12-07-2007 1:02 pm

Why am I always the last person to recognise something as being sinister.
- L.M. 12-12-2007 8:13 am

add a comment to this page:

Your post will be captioned "posted by anonymous,"
or you may enter a guest username below:

Line breaks work. HTML tags will be stripped.