| re: Deadringer cover. | |
|
Posted by: |
ricgough 01:08 am UTC 09/19/08 |
| In reply to: | re: Deadringer cover. - Willis 02:48 am UTC 09/18/08 |
| The bike really doesn't represent much in relation to the painting - you're loosing sight of the fact it's primary purpose is to sell an album to people - most of whom will probably not be familair with the painting. The composition of the cover is ostensibly the same in composition as the painting - 5 interlocking triangles in the painting, 3 in the cover. The use of light and shade is an obvious reference to the painting. You see that the images on the cover are greatly exaggerated as opposed to those in the painting - that it is an altogether simpler scene is nescessary as in order to make any kind of detail visibly significant on such a small (12inch) space you can't have as much going on. The original painting is the size of an entire wall and took 2 whole years to create. You have the 'michael-angelic' figure on the motorcycle from the original 'bat' cover. As it was such a strong image and instantly associated with the first Meat Loaf album then that was the probable starting point for the artist rather than the historical, romantic painting. Even so, those that had seen it would have probably got the intellectual joke. 1981 the whole 'little richard Wagner' thing was being used to describe and promote Jim's music. It was after all a Steinman penned album and then more so than now Jim was synonymous with Meat. In those good old days there was more of an effort to represent the contents of the sleeve on the cover, rather than today's clamour for ulttra modern design influenced by what would be attractive to the target demographic. Jim's work had already been described as Wagner but massively exaggerated with contemporary influences so it's not a massive step to grossly exaggerate with contemporary influencesa painting from the same same of era Wagner and Gericault were about 15-20 years apart I think. The 'medusa' essay (linky thing) offers insight into the 'trademark' muscular figure of the renaissance and baroque. As Jim 'tips his hat' to Wagner in his work Corben 'tips his hat' to the great renaissance painters in his depiction of 'guy on a motorcycle' I'd be surprised if the ceiling of the cistine chapel didn't come into Jim's thinking when he visualised Baal also - but that's besides the point. If you're looking to be able to appraise the album cover in the same way as the painting then it can't be done, but there is obviously a reference to the painting in the album art. It's a way of implying that the contents of the record share similar artistic roots to that of Wagner, Gericault and Michaelangelo. Works the same way in archetecture. Municipal buildings and museums etc are often built in a neo-classcal or romanesque style which infers the authority of rome or ancient greece to the artefacts displayed or business conducted inside. It's pretty much the same thing with the cover. That's my take on it anyhow. Also my take on the Muscular figure on many of the covers in reply to Smeg's question on the matter down the board. (is there more to it?) I'm no authority on art or art history (but I know what I like :-)) so any input from those in the know or involved in decision making for the cover art would be greatly appreciated. I may be well of the mark, but I've more than an incling that I might just be right. One thing for sure is that whether it's the painting or cover that you're viewing the following is equally applicable: “We are all lost at sea, washed between hope and despair, hailing something that may never come to rescue us.” (Julian Barnes). .... apart from the Hero on the motorcycle that is. That could also be the narrative for the cover. The 'Raft' is quite deliberate in not portarying a hero. 'Deadringer' sort of adds one to the scene. Superceeds the original in that respect, It could well be implying that the music contained within does the same. Just a thought. > So the bike represents the Medusa? This did get my cells > ticking, but much of it I don't see the correlation. Some > I do. > > I dunno... > > > Sorry, here's the link (again) > > > > > It's a parody. > > > > > > Educate yourselves on it's origins, and those of the > > > 'muscualr form' in art here.... > > > > > > Should get the brain-cells ticking. > > > > > > (sorry to post the link twice but unsure how many bother > > > to scroll down the board.) > > > > > > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Deadringer cover. - Willis 02:48 am UTC 09/18/08 |
| Next: | re: Deadringer cover. - Willis 11:35 pm UTC 09/19/08 |
| Thread: |
|