"Grotesque Buxom Woman with Misshapen Hands"

30" x 50"

Second prize winner of the 1999 Thrift Store Art Acquisition Party. I'm officially soliciting explanatory text and/or descriptions for this one, as I'm completely at a loss for words with regards to the painting.......


05-April-2000 - The masses certainly have spoken, judging by the following response to my request for explanatory text. The comments below are courtesy of a Mr. Greg Gerber. Judging by his insights, Mr. Gerber is either a raving lunatic, or one of the most astute observers of Thrift Store Art this side of the Louvre.....


"Your comments regarding this piece of art state that you are at a loss for words to describe it. I would like to offer my viewpoint:"

"I think that some skilled painters have the ability to use angles or shapes to draw our attention and our eyes to a certain point in the painting. Conversely, that same skill can purposely divert our attention away from a point in the painting, such as in a fine nude painting, where the curve of the neck, placement of an arm, or the angle of the legs can divert our attention to the fact that his/her "naughty bits" are on display. I think that may be the case with this piece. What may appear to be bad, may actually be highly skilled. Personally, I think there is a hidden image in the piece, with so many distractions to divert our attention from this image. I was immediately distracted by the fact that her head has been cut off. And that she has either a Tammy Faye Bakker or Zulu warrior makeup job. I'm leaning toward the Zulu, as she appears to have corn-row hair. The stark, yet curvy lines in the piece serve to confuse the mind, further creating that distraction. And are those not the hands of the Elephant Man? And what are those on her legs? Leather boots? Frederick's of Hollywood fishnet stockings? Lacrosse padding? And why did the artist give her Emmitt Smith's calves? I think all of this serves to divert our attention from the hidden image, located dead center in the middle of the painting. At first I thought it was something in the style of Salvador Dali, but it isn't. Do you see the eye under her left breast? Just below that there appears to be a crude nose, next to her shirt. The crude line down the center of her belly frames a side of a face. And the brushstrokes, crude and haphazard throughout the painting, now take shape in what appears to whiskers. Bad art? I think not. This could only be a tribute to one of Broadway's longest running musicals, Cats. Having said all that, I reserve the possibility that it is just really bad art, by a sick and demented artist in need of professional help."

Previous / Next
Gallery IX