I have been lucky to see a number of Doig’s works in his Retrospective: No Foreign Lands in Scottish National Gallery in Edinburgh 2013. Having not heard of him before and having seen pictures of his work on the internet I wasn’t that keen but I have to say it was one of the best exhibitions I have been to. So good I went back later that day!
This is a perfect example of how visiting a work of art in person is a totally different experience to viewing in a book or screen. On the computer screen I though his paintings looked fairly garish and chaotic with their unnatural colours and sketchy representations of the figure. In the flesh however, the sheer size of some of them is awesome but the thing I remember most is the radiance and light that his technique of layering glazes of colour creates.
Doig was born in Edinburgh before his family moved to Trinidad and then Canada. He studied in London but then returned to Trinidad where he now lives.
One of his paintings, “Pelican (Stag)”
https://www.artsy.net/artwork/peter-doig-pelican-stag is explained by the artists inspiration for the painting. He draws from previous experiences for many of his paintings and this one is based on an incident he witnessed of a man killing a pelican on a beach (presumably for food) and then dragging it off. Doig was clearly affected by this and he focuses on the glare that the man gives him. The “Stag” in brackets is a reference to a particular brand of beer which Doig uses in several paintings to represent “manliness”.
The man is highlighted in a shaft of light while surrounded by gloom. Doig has allowed the paint to drip and dribble at the bottom which gives a liquid impression of water as he splashes through the sea. The colours are vivid and striking. Its clear that Doig felt threatened by this experience. His return to the scene in another painting “Pelican” in 2004
https://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-britain/exhibition/peter-doig/peter-doig-explore-exhibition-room-1/peter-doig-4 but this time the emphasis has changed. No longer are we made to feel vulnerable under the man’s stare. Instead he is a ghostly figure as if disappearing into memories and his face is barely visible . Doig has removed “Stag” from the title so perhaps he is demonstrating that he no longer remembers the scene with such menace.
Ghost-like figures are a recurring subject in Doigs work. Often figures are transparent and the viewer is able to see the background objects through them. This is a great way of creating atmosphere and gives and otherworldly impression of the scene. I wasn’t entirely sure that this was the impression Doig intended but that’s certainly how they made me feel.
One of my favourite paintings in the exhibition was “Man Dressed as Bat” 2007 http://www.artnet.com/magazineus/reviews/robinson/robinson2-6-09_detail.asp?picnum=5 At first glance I thought it was a butterfly and then you see the head (all be it a strange shape) and legs and realise its a person. The title removes any of the mystery. If he had named this painting something obscure and unrelated, the viewer would have to give their own interpretation which is unlikely to be a man dressed as a bat. This is perhaps one of the reason I feel that Doig did not necessarily intend to create an ominous mood.
The wonderful thing about this painting is the translucent layers which allow the underneath coats to glow through. These layers, with their uneven translucent edges appear to give the impression of flapping movement. The effect of paint dripping originated from a happy accident when the canvas was affected by a leaky roof. The water stains have been left visible and Doig has emphasised them by painting with very liquid pigment and allowing it to dribble. The ominous nature of the swooping bat is alleviated by the colours used. If this had been painted in greys or blacks, the effect would be very different but instead of a spooky bat the figure is more of an angel. He discusses this painting and his process in the Tate video https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=219&v=H2136XuCWx8
This technique of using thin layers of very liquid paint which are allowed to dribble is common to Doigs work but it is the main feature in some paintings. “Mal d’Estomac” 2008 https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2009/sep/20/guide-to-painting-peter-doig is typical of this. The painting is the most abstract of the exhibition only consisting of three monochrome shapes. The paint has been applied so thinly it is possible to see the canvas shining though in some places, giving a luminosity and glow to the paint. It is supposed to represent a cloud sitting on a pink sea and is related to another of Doig’s paintings which depicts a person in water appearing to drown with her head inside a bubble. The name of the painting refers to a stomach malady that killed many people in Trinidad and resulted in a bay being given the same name. Whether Doig is referring to the location or the malady by giving the painting this title it is not clear.
The application of translucent layers of watery paint is fundamental to its effect, giving the surface texture and almost an impression of movement or vibration. I felt the cloud more resembles a bag hovering above the sea, about to burst and empty its contents (and thereby disturbing the perfect serenity of the scene). Again, therefore I have attributed a threatening nature to his image and in this case I’m not sure why but I definitely sense something is imminent and there is impending doom on the horizon, quite literally.
A more literal interpretation of translucent layers is “Black Curtain (Toward Monkey Island)” http://thisistomorrow.info/articles/peter-doig-no-foreign-lands which shows a view from a window of a peninsula of land, clearly at night as shown by the stars and lights. The unique thing about this landscape is the presence of a net-like curtain in between the scene and the viewer which adds an element of frustration as the viewer tries to figure out the scene behind. Initially I didn’t understand why the piece was called black curtain because the curtain is clearly white but then I realised that the painting is named not because of the predominant element of the net curtain with its vertical lines but actually the small edge of black curtain that is only just visible at the left side. The importance of this detail to the artist is thus significant. He uses it to anchor the viewer inside a house and behind a window. The curtains themselves become part of the landscape and the artist wants them to be considered. There was an almost voyeuristic feeling when looking at the painting as if I was hiding behind the curtain and no one could see me.
I found a National Galleries video of him talking about the exhibition https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IKe529_2kM and another from the Walker Art Gallery about his painting Blotter and how he staged a photo for inspiration which was interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbcSAYYoAYw
I’ve always liked to have a go at copying his style of transparent layers which are almost like watercolours but never tried. He uses thinned out oil paint on canvas so it required a bit of planning as I’d stopped using oils due to headaches and I don’t think you could replicate it with acrylics. However, I decided to give it a go as someone recommended the turpentine substitute Zest-it.
Looking at “Man Dressed as Bat”, the 1st layer looked blue on the upper part and reddish on the lower. Using left over paint (and not worrying about colour matching) I applied a thin layer of paint to small pieces of primed canvas paper. I allowed the paint to drip vertically and I was quite taken with the tree like patterns forming on the sheet, despite being nothing like Doig’s work!
Once this layer had dried (didn’t take long), I mixed some murky colours and loosly painted in the shapes in Doig’s painting. This experiment is as much a test of the Zest-It thinner for me and I found it quite good. The smell of orange is very strong so I had to open the window but I didn’t seem to get a head-ache which was good. I also seemed to thin the paint very well and didn’t leave residue on the brush when it was cleaned which was something I found with other turps substitutes.
With regards to copying his style, I would need to keep going with applying a layer, waiting for it to dry cycle to get his effects of movement but I think I can see how it was done. I’m wondering if some of the painting was done of the floor to stop the drips and allow it to pool (the edges of the legs are whiter) but that might just be the layers or he may have just painted that in. It’s also a very different technique when it’s done on a large scale like his.
Understanding Painting Media Learning Log 