Young Writers Society

Home » Literary works » Art » Review

E - Everyone

1981 - Peter Booth

by MichaelaBobbin


Peter Booths painting titled 1981 depicts a crowd of mutant men compacted in a small space appearing to worship a mutant man with a crocodile head in a red cape sitting above them on a stump. The crowd is composed of only me, most with mouths agape others with their tongues handing out like fools. The crowd looks up to the figure following it with blind awe. The crowd appear as a sadistic bunch with solid builds and chunky faces, wearing Mohawks, masks and spiked dog collars. One figure mysteriously wrapped in bandages like an Egyptian mummy is the only figure who faces away from the tyrant leader of the pack and appears to be heading away. The heavy clothing matches the description of Booths main figure from painting 1977 who is leaving the scene of decomposing faces and what looks like the sketchy version of where’s Wally. The painting is done in Booths typical pallet of grey, black and red with glimpses of other colours such as orange and yellow scattered about. Booths work is rich and aggressive in colour but not as violent as painting 1977, though his brushstrokes are still done in a hasty manner.

Booths painting portrays the evil side of humanity in a gruesome style that I found represented hell. The leader wears a red cape that suggest power and is surrounded by corruption in the form of followers, all who look like bad people with twisted expressions. The lead mutant features are what most depictions of the devil are; a twisted mutant monster. The crocodile head signifies a predator and mummified figure down the bottom are both consistent with Egyptian mythology and the Gods being half human half animal suggesting this figure is viewed and worshiped as a God while he sits on his stump and preaches to the ‘people.’ The hellish scene and leader oddly remind me of Hitler and his army. I found the mummified figure down the bottom in heavy clothing to be the main figure from 1977 his covered face consists with the ‘wool pulled over the eyes’ term and is leaving the scene. Perhaps this is the inside of the city the figure in 1977 is leaving, the havoc and destruction scene leaking out of the city is because of this crowd and a follow on painting.

I found this piece hard at first to decipher and understand, I still don’t think I do, but find it is deep with multiple layers of understanding which keeps viewers captivated and puzzled, involving them in the riddle like structure. The Red is well spaced and spread out in important manner, perhaps signifying the second in commands and right-hand men which adds more intrigue, does this mean something or just a coincident? The white, grey and black colour tones work well in making the red stand out while the hastily brushstrokes work well in creating a rough and realistic depiction as well as adding a dark air that shows the dangers of these creatures. The starkness helps draw the eye and gives the illusion that your about to step into this scene, which is confronting and a little scary. Overall I wouldn’t want to hang this in my house, it’s an interesting piece but a bit of a downer to look at all day – everybody would leave depressed and suicidal.


Note: You are not logged in, but you can still leave a comment or review. Before it shows up, a moderator will need to approve your comment (this is only a safeguard against spambots). Leave your email if you would like to be notified when your message is approved.







Is this a review?


  

Comments



User avatar
746 Reviews


Points: 3841
Reviews: 746

Donate
Sun May 01, 2016 5:02 am
View Likes
Aley wrote a review...



Hey MichaelaBobbin,

Overall I think you have a good eye for detail when it comes to paintings, and I like that about your review. You describe the artwork very well which can be hard to do, and I think your descriptions yield well to your conclusions and theories about the art as they show the biases you've formed.

I think what you need to improve about the way that you write the analysis of this piece is with what you're going into detail about. When you make a point about something being like something else, you need to back it up. Now you don't need to back it up by saying "This does this and here's a source" but you need to back things up like "The hellish scene and leader oddly remind me of Hitler and his army." and expand on that idea. The reason being because we are reading your review/analysis of this artwork in order to understand where you're coming from so you've got to invite us into that world and expand it by saying what is hellish about the scene. Is it just that it's corrupted? Also, how does it remind you of Hitler? What aspects about it remind you of that? I think the more you really go into details about things like that, the better your analysis is going to get because it's going to help you analyze things further than you are right now.

Other than that, you've got a couple typos in here, and these paragraphs are sort of long, so you might want to break them up a bit. Just side-thoughts though.

Mostly, my complaint is you don't go in depth enough, aka: I want more >3

I hope to see more from you too.
Aley




User avatar
123 Reviews


Points: 2962
Reviews: 123

Donate
Sun May 01, 2016 4:26 am
View Likes
FatCowsSis wrote a review...



Hello!
Round 3! Let's get in the drill.

Once again, watch the possessive forms when referencing people. I don't see the need to quote that, as I've done so in the last two reviews.

The leader wears a red cape that suggest power and is surrounded by corruption in the form of followers, all who look like bad people with twisted expressions.

First off, I think you meant "suggests" there rather than "suggest". Secondly, I think you have a much more expressive vocabulary than saying bad people. Perhaps wicked, evil, corrupt, or something along those lines would help to express this situation better.
The lead mutant features are what most depictions of the devil are; a twisted mutant monster.

That semicolon should be a colon.
The Red is well spaced and spread out in important manner, perhaps signifying the second in commands and right-hand men which adds more intrigue, does this mean something or just a coincident?

The word 'red' does not need to be capitalized. "Coincident" should be "coincidence" in this scenario. Also, you need to add "or is this just a coincidence?" Or at least something along those lines.

I like how you referenced Adolf Hitler. It seems especially fitting when you consider Booth's history. Once again, your interpretation and explanation of the piece are wonderful. Absolutely intriguing. Thank you for writing this piece.
Keep writing,
-Sis





A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.
— Paul Simon