February 12, 2018

The "engaged and assertive demeanor" of Obama in his portrait "contradicts — and cosmetically corrects — the impression he often made in office of being philosophically detached from what was going on around him."

"At some level, all portraits are propaganda, political or personal. And what makes this one distinctive is the personal part. [The artist Kehinde] Wiley has set Mr. Obama against — really embedded him in — a bower of what looks like ground cover. From the greenery sprout flowers that have symbolic meaning for the sitter. African blue lilies represent Kenya, his father’s birthplace; jasmine stands for Hawaii, where Mr. Obama himself was born; chrysanthemums, the official flower of Chicago, reference the city where his political career began, and where he met his wife."

Writes the art critic Holland Carter at the NYT, where you can see the portrait, which is kind of interesting, especially if you like your President well embedded in foliage.

Now, the portrait of Michelle Obama, on the other hand — by a different artist, Amy Sherald — is a lot worse. And I'm not saying that because I need a lot of leaves and flowers in official portraits or because it's mostly blue background and huge geometrically patterned skirt. It's that the face is such a small part of the thing and it doesn't look like her.

As Holland Carter puts it:
The dress design, by Michelle Smith, is eye-teasingly complicated: mostly white interrupted by black Op Art-ish blips and patches of striped color suggestive of African textiles. The shape of the dress, rising pyramidally upward, mountain-like, feels as if it were the real subject of the portrait. Mrs. Obama’s face forms the composition’s peak, but could be almost anyone’s face, like a model’s face in a fashion spread. To be honest, I was anticipating — hoping for — a bolder, more incisive image of the strong-voiced person I imagine this former first lady to be, one for whom I could easily envision a continuing political future.

157 comments:

rhhardin said...

The poison ivy represents racial healing.

Lem said...

That is not a pose I would ever attach to Michelle. It’s definitely not her.

Matthew Sablan said...

Obama was more than philosophically detached. He was managerially detached, which is why he only ever heard about bad things from the television.

Or he was a liar. Either or.

On the actual portrait: I like when artists hide nuggets like the imagery/meaning of the flowers. Like all the old portraits with books and fruits to imply things about the subject. It's just good artistry.

rhhardin said...

First ladies are like younger sisters of ruthless dictators.

J Scott said...

Reminds of that Homer Simpson clip where he emerges/disappears from the bush. Memetically used to signify someone seeing something they don't/shouldn't see and then fading away into the bush.

Bushes. There's your althousian observation.

buwaya said...

The only symbolically accurate portrait of Obama will show the strings and where they are attached.

The Michelle picture looks like a generic fashion photo, with an anonymous model, as noted.

Lem said...

for eight years Obama jetted like the 1% of the 1%. The foliage represents how the media covered him.

Cheryl said...

You were the first person I thought of when I happened to see Michelle's portrait unveiled today. It reminds of me old-fashioned portraits that left the face blank, to be filled in when a commission was accepted. It truly bears very little resemblance to her. The dress is really cool, but the face doesn't resemble the former First Lady, and the hands/shoulders/face seem out of proportion to each other.

The color palette reminds me of putting a weird Instagram filter on a photo. It's so cold that it is off-putting. And it seems to turn her skin color almost ashen. I didn't like her, but this portrait isn't worthy of her. "Wow" is the only appropriate reaction here, I think.

Matthew Sablan said...

Yeah. Looking at the face on Michelle's portrait, I don't recognize her, and I'm not sure if I ever recall seeing her hair like that. The focus of the piece seemed more on the dress than the person, which would've been fine if there was meaning in the dress, but it sounds like it was just a fashion design. Putting her in blue space also de-emphasizes any grounding of the subject, again making me think, "I should be looking at the dress."

Fabi said...

Does Obama's halo look good in the portrait?

MadisonMan said...

(B) Obama's fingers/hands look extraordinarily large/long -- I guess to reflect the Democratic penchant for pickpocketing money from citizens' wallets?

anti-de Sitter space said...

What?

It seems like this would have been an opportunity for Althouse to read a piece (not to mention the associated comments, if there are any) and look for angles re her jabbering about how she (supposedly) opposes DJT being tied into everything (i.e.precisely what she'd be doing herself).

No irony today.

Gordon Scott said...

They're both getting the portraits they deserve.

Remember the controversy over Peter Hurd's portrait of LBJ? Johnson refused to accept it, calling it "the ugliest thing I ever saw." Hurd sent the painting out on tour. I remember my parents taking me to see it at a radio station in an nearby town. I looked at it just now, and it's a lot better portrait than either of the Obamas'.

Darrell said...

We've got our portraits if the $3 Bill is ever authorized.

Fabi said...

"Yo -- look at the crease in my trousers, will ya!"

Humperdink said...

I see the crease in his slacks is prominently displayed. David Brooks will be slobbering all afternoon. The PBS News Hour makeup crew will have their work cut out for them.

Humperdink said...

Fabi ..... ha ha

Hagar said...

Obama has some very large hands inn that portrait.

Lem said...

Lol Humperdinck.

Fabi said...

I hadn't followed the link to the portraits when I made my comment, Humperdink -- it's even funnier now.

Cheryl said...

Okay, I read that the grey skin tone is one of the artist's techniques. Wow. I guess it's a taste thing but grey skin never sounds like a good idea.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

This is what happens when the affirmative action president hires affirmative action painters.

AllenS said...

Looking at Michelle's portrait, I guess they all don't look alike. Who knew?

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

the first presidential couple claiming African descent

Does anyone have a PC decoder. What is the author of the article trying to say here. The Obama's identify has having African ancestors. Some other presidential couple refused to claim their African ancestors.

Humperdink said...

I thought manspreading was out.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

Not sure why an apostrophe is on the Obama's name.

Ah now I see. Stupid autocorrect.

Big Mike said...

I didn't want to waste one of my limited accesses to the Times but found the portraits over at BusinessInsider.com. That has to be to worst background for a presidential portrait since forever. Also his hands look too large for his arms. Agree about Michelle's portrait -- whoever it is, it's not her. Wrong hairdo, and where's her trademark snarling expression?

And Obama was not "philosophically detached" -- he was in on every single abuse of his office (ignoring the War Powers Act in Libya, weaponizing the IRS against the Tea Party, spying on the Trump campaign, Hillary's Email server, the infamous Title IX "preponderance of the evidence) right up to his eyeballs.

rcocean said...

President as hippie flower child

mockturtle said...

I thought manspreading was out.

Yeah, Humperdink, I noticed that too. The implication is that Obama has some yuuuge balls.

The Michelle portrait is better, IMO, but it looks nothing like her. Or maybe that's why.

Mr Wibble said...

The portraits fit the Obamas: they're an attempt to be seen as hip and part of the avant-garde, but will quickly become dated and sad.

rcocean said...

And not really my style. I prefer JOHN SINGER SARGENT

Henry said...

The Obama portrait is quite good. It's a good portrait and intriguing at the same time. As for "engaged and assertive", the artist seems to have captured him watching television.

walter said...

Looks like he's enduring a time out. All the headroom diminishes him.
Maybe this was his spot to grab a smoke.

rhhardin said...

They could be worked into a quilt, if you wanted to sell quilts cheap.

rcocean said...

Michelle always needed lots of big dresses to cover her large somewhat clunky body.

Fabi said...

Out: velvet Elvis
In: velvet Obama

Browndog said...

I guess making the point that Obama has bigger hands than Trump was a priority.

Saint Croix said...

those are both horrible

Obama looks like a guy who is completely out of place

like he's been teleported from some office into the green

and has no idea how he got there or what he should do

he literally does not belong where he is

my suspicion is the artist is secretly a Republican

and is mocking the hell out him

people will laugh about this for years

Henry said...

Mr. Holland's last paragraph is truly wince-worthy.

Also noted -- a poke at Chuck Close. Mr. Holland wants you to know that he is totally hip to current events.

Balfegor said...

The Obama portrait isn't terrible (and the standard of presidential portraiture is not especially high anyhow), but it's kind of flat. I mean, there's no depth to the foliage at all. If the artist was going to go that direction, I don't know why he didn't just go full Klimt.

Matt said...

It looks like Barack Obama hired Henri Rousseau to paint his portrait. The foliage and Obama's figure are competing for attention. I'm not sure Obama is winning. The only thing missing is a tiger.

Are we still allowed to call this style of art "primitive"?

rhhardin said...

Rush: it looks like Obama's out in the weeds

Humperdink said...

Wow, scratching my head with a hacksaw blade. CNN's Chris Callizza: "This is a beautiful portrait. It looks very little like Michelle Obama"

Fabi said...

They did a reasonable job of camouflaging Michelle's cock!

Francisco D said...

Fab wins the thread.

Velvet Obama! I love it.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

Obama's portrait kinda reminds me of him watching the Osama raid. He looks out of place and fading into the foliage.

Humperdink said...

The age old question: "Does this dress make me look fat?". Um, yes.

Sally327 said...

At least they don't have those big eyes.


Bob Boyd said...

"especially if you like your President well embedded in foliage."

It's a hedge.

Saint Croix said...

to the future!

I will take you to our green future!

sitting in my dead tree chair

with my suit made in China

Birches said...

I do like Obama's portrait. It is different but not in an obnoxious way. Michelle does not look right. And it seems a little Marie Antoinette with that huge dress. No good.

Fabi said...

Will this resurrect the worship of Michelle's well-toned arms?

edutcher said...

Mike's has a Gauguin vibe, although the pose is very feminist. Makes her look better and more alluring than she is. I must say I like it.

Zippy's is a different person, not our little Barry. He was never that intense or thoughtful (thoughtless, usually). And the shrubbery looks like it's taking over, like the jungle at Tikal once the Mayans left.

Or his legacy once The Donald took office.

YMMV

Saint Croix said...

I like Teddy's

rhhardin said...

It's not too soon to begin planning Trump's official portrait.

The Orchid would be a good flower.

traditionalguy said...

Obama tried hard to act out the detached, but caring, demeanor of an Undertaker. He saw himself as the man assigned to undertake burial rites for the USA.

SteveBrooklineMA said...

His is better than hers, but it seems almost cartoonish to me. Like a Mad Magazine cover.
https://goo.gl/images/eEusuc

Temujin said...

I think Michell's portrait nails the disapproving look she generally carried around with her while going around the country. She does not like us. And by 'us' I mean you- all of you. Her country, the people in it. After awhile that look just stays. I think the artist captured her look, but not the details of her face.

Obama in real life was detached. And honored for it. People bestowed their best wishes and hopes onto him. He didn't even have to speak. He got a Nobel Prize just for...being. People swooned at his speeches, which carried steroidal levels of pap and mushiness. They heard from him what they wanted to hear. Most of the press still does. He's really a blank slate. I suspect he's sitting there thinking..."do I have any Cheetos at home, or do we need to stop and get some on the way home?"

Saint Croix said...

this is way better, I think

Humperdink said...

I thought of Wrigley Field when I first saw the backdrop. Not sure why he's ankle deep in ivy. Shoeless Joe Jackson maybe? The outfield warning track would have been more apropos.

madAsHell said...

His engaged and assertive demeanor....is about to be overwhelmed by kudzu.

Her picture is a mulligan, and she seems to be saying "Pass the Charmin".

Bob Boyd said...

Didn't Obama call himself The Bear?
Is it just me or does this picture look kinda like Obama is taking a shit in the woods?

mockturtle said...

Is it just me or does this picture look kinda like Obama is taking a shit in the woods?

Bob, that crossed my mind, too.

mockturtle said...

What does an outdoor portrait have to do with Obama, anyway? He is the quintessential urbanite.

Balfegor said...

Re: Saint Croix --

That's a more conventional portrait, but the colours make it seem a little too reminiscent of the Kennedy portrait. Maybe that's the idea, though -- give him a little bit of the reflected lustre of so-called "Camelot."

J Melcher said...

The pattern in the background reminds me of those in the "magic eye" stereo-optic prints for which defocused vision on that background creates a 3D image of a subject in the foreground.

Unknown said...

Someone photo-shopped the Bergdahls out of the Obama portrait.

Saint Croix said...

Here is the Francis J. Underwood portrait.





Blue Ox said...

Why does Barack have six fingers on his left hand and a tan line where his wedding ring used to be?

Howard said...

Nice try. The foliage deal makes the man pop. Unfortunately, the actual portrait of the man is pedestrian... the typical stick up the ass countenance.

Agree with St. Croix, that superior portrait really shows the cunning and arrogance of Obama in both countenance and body language. Also, it's very painterly done in the style of Richard Schmid.

walter said...

A handy comparison

Hagar said...

Wait - these are going to be their official portraits?

Howard said...

St Croix: you have great taste in art. Love FU. His face resembles a Lucian Freud style, but more importantly many facets of his character shines through.

Tommy Duncan said...

We need a little poetry at a moment like this:

Pretty women wonder where my secret lies.
I'm not cute or built to suit a fashion model's size
But when I start to tell them,
They think I'm telling lies.
I say,
It's in the reach of my arms
The span of my hips,
The stride of my step,
The curl of my lips.
I'm a woman
Phenomenally.
Phenomenal woman,
That's me.

--Maya Angelou

FullMoon said...

Google image search looking for larger example of Michelles portrait resulted in:

Best guess for this image: cartoon
All else aside, one thing always bugged me about Michelle was wearing wigs. All the pro black positive stuff coming from her seems that going natural would have been a plus. One photo of her on treadmill with no wig was described as having her hair pulled back(or something), avoiding fact she wears wigs.Nothing wrong with wearing a wig, but seems poor black women hard pressed to afford it. Maybe they are not as expensive as I think?

Bob Boyd said...

Perhaps the protrait is saying: It was an Ivy background that made him stand out, but in the end Obama didn't stand for anything.

FullMoon said...

The pattern in the background reminds me of those in the "magic eye" stereo-optic prints for which defocused vision on that background creates a 3D image of a subject in the foreground.

If you un-focus your eyes just right, the foliage reveals Trump laughing in the background. Weird.

Virgil Hilts said...

I give a A+ for the Barack one, but think how cool it would have been with a cigarette in his hand. The other touch I would have added is a snake with the head of Valeire Jarett, peaking through the foilage.
Michelle's is truly abominable. If I were an Art teacher in high scool, it gets a B, in college it gets a C+, in the context of actually paying someone to do a portrain for this purpose, a D-.

Virgil Hilts said...

Saint Croix said...this is way better, I think 2/12/18, 11:41 AM
That one is terrific! Both channel Humphrey Bogart and the cirgarette stained and chapped lips.

Jupiter said...

"the strong-voiced person I imagine this former first lady to be"

Oh, she's got a bray on her alright.

Freeman Hunt said...

I like this artist, but Obama is more handsome than that, and this picture almost makes it look like he is hiding in the bushes, which is both odd and un-Obama.

mockturtle said...

Full Moon asserts: Nothing wrong with wearing a wig, but seems poor black women hard pressed to afford it.

Hah! If they can afford weaves, they can afford wigs.

EDH said...

If there's a bustle in your hedgerow, don't be alarmed now...

And as we wind on down the road
Our shadows taller than our soul.

mockturtle said...

If these are official portraits, it doesn't speak well of our artists today. If they aren't going for realism they may as well go full cubism.

Freeman Hunt said...

I'd like the Obama one better if it didn't look like the greenery was starting to grow up his legs. Leave our President alone, malignant plants!

Saint Croix said...

St Croix: you have great taste in art.

Thank you!

Now if I could just sell mine...

Freeman Hunt said...

Michelle has never worn her hair that flat on top, has she?

mockturtle said...

I'd like the Obama one better if it didn't look like the greenery was starting to grow up his legs. Leave our President alone, malignant plants!

Kudzu?

Professional lady said...

I think Trump should have his portrait painted on black velvet a la Elvis portraiture.

rcocean said...

"What does an outdoor portrait have to do with Obama, anyway? He is the quintessential urbanite."

Actually, he usually vacationed in Kauai and spent a week or two weeks on Brando's island in French Polynesia.

IRC, he's into skin diving, surfing and swimming.

rcocean said...

But yeah, he's not a country boy.

Sebastian said...

The O portrait captures his weirdness very well: he was always a man out of place.

walter said...

How long before Photoshoppers replace the chair with a porcelain throne?

Fabi said...

Michelle should have been in overalls and hold a hoe, tending to her vegetable garden.

Fabi said...

*ing

Sydney said...

From the Business Insider link from an earlier comment:
"Amy, I want to thank you for so spectacularly capturing the grace, and beauty, and intelligence, and charm, and hotness of the woman that I love," Obama said, to laughs in the audience.

That is the advantage of a portrait. Sometimes you get lucky and an artist makes you better than you are. The only way that portrait looks like Michelle Obama is the sleevelessness of the dress. She wears sleeveless well. Not many of us can do that.

And yes, the Frank Underwood portrait is better than either of these. And that was just a prop for a TV show!

Jim at said...

No portrait can conceal the ugliness inside the Obamas.

Mountain Maven said...

Affirmative Action artists in action.

Bill said...

It reminds me a bit of Brian Organ's 1980 portrait of Prince Charles.

Blue Ox said...

Barack's looks like a weird version of Roxy Music's Country Life cover.

Thankfully, Michelle's looks nothing like the Country Life cover.

madAsHell said...

Michelle has never worn her hair that flat on top, has she?

This seems to be more of the artist's impressions than it is a photo-realistic picture.

AlbertAnonymous said...

W. G. A. F. ?

Really...

Bill said...

I'd like the Obama one better if it didn't look like the greenery was starting to grow up his legs. Leave our President alone, malignant plants!

They're commencing to give him a thrill up the leg(s).

Rumpletweezer said...

Michelle looks more like Jessica Alba.

holdfast said...

At least Michelle's scowl is pretty accurate.

Both are pathetic attempts to be trendy, and in 50 years will look weird and stupid.

mikeski said...

Freeman Hunt said...
this picture almost makes it look like he is hiding in the bushes, which is both odd and un-Obama.


Nope, it's very symbolic, in fact. Every time something bad happened in his presidency, he hid behind the Bushes.

edutcher said...

Blue Ox said...

Why does Barack have six fingers on his left hand and a tan line where his wedding ring used to be?

The artist figured out he's the One who had William Ayers write his most famous book.

To Serve Man.

dustbunny said...

Michelle: It’s all about the dress. It should never be all about the dress unless you are painting Louis XIV.
Barack: overtaken by the call of the wild, but it’s a nice portrait.

Darrell said...

Michelle's real hair is the same length as Barack's. Why wasn't her real hair shown?

jwl said...

I thought both portraits were awful. Michelle doesn't look anything like herself while President's has weird perspective, when I first looked at I thought it was vine covered wall and Barack is somehow floating in air on a chair.

Amadeus 48 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Amadeus 48 said...

Best official US presidential portrait: J. S. Sargent's painting of Theodore Roosevelt.
Best unofficial US presidential portrait: Abraham Lincoln's last sitting with Alexander Gardner in February 1865.

Virgil Hilts said...

The comments re the 6 fingers intrigued me. Apparently something odd about his hands makes it look from certain angles as though he has 6 fingers (just google it). Cool that the artist may have decided to have fun with it. https://www.flickr.com/photos/bar-art/8439248657

JML said...


Blogger Humperdink said...

... Not sure why he's ankle deep in ivy...

I agree, because if it was an accurate portrait it would show him ankle deep in shit.

BJM said...

Cuffy has the best tweet take thus far: "Obama finally succeeded in putting Bush behind him."

Achilles said...

They can put it up next to his mugshot when he is indicted.

gerry said...

I love it when postmodern portrait art ruins its postmodern subject matter.

Will said...

How awesome and entirely fitting they put our Chance the Gardener potus in front of an actual garden!!

Roughcoat said...

This portrait of Obama better captures the essence of the man:

https://www.livescience.com/24021-easter-island-rapa-nui.html

gerry said...

I also love the detail of the hands.

Quaestor said...

It looks like Obama posed while taking an exceptionally uncomfortable bowel movement.

Humperdink said...

gerry said: "I also love the detail of the hands."

The thumb is on the wrong side of his hand.

Humperdink said...

Paraphrasing a comment from another site: "Michelle Obama has not had biceps that small since the eighth grade picnic".

Susan said...

I was expecting figs and apes.

Hagar said...

It is his left hand and the thumb is on the right side, but does not look natural with the other fingers spread as they are.

It is hard to believe the Obamas will let these paintings pass as their official portraits.

Hagar said...

The angles with his forearms do not match his upper arms either?

Hagar said...

Oops. You are right. What looks kind of like a thumb held under is on the wrong side.

JaimeRoberto said...

The thick foliage represents the media hiding his scandals.

Michael McClain said...

Agree with Saint Croix. Much better portrait.

madAsHell said...

Isn't that Clint Eastwood's chair??

Hagar said...

His left hand may have started out as a right hand and the wedding band shifted over.
Isn't there also something odd about how Obama and the chair do not quite match?
Besides free-floating in the foliage?

CWJ said...

"As for 'engaged and assertive', the artist seems to have captured him watching television."

Or a mirror.

MountainMan said...

So the artist who painted Obama's portrait also painted this picture of a powerful black woman beheading a white woman.

Why would you choose such an artist to paint an official portrait?

Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...

MountainMan: So the artist who painted Obama's portrait also painted this picture of a powerful black woman beheading a white woman.

And it's as badly done as his portrait.

Why would you choose such an artist to paint an official portrait?

Rhetorical question, right?

buwaya said...

"So the artist who painted Obama's portrait also painted this picture of a powerful black woman beheading a white woman."

This is a better painting than Obama's portrait, regardless of the subject.
It is a striking and elegant pose, a face of character, and would not have shamed some 19th century Frenchman. The subject would be an Assyrian's head, of course, and he would have called it "Judith Beheading Holofernes".

And done something about that awful background.

mockturtle said...

So the artist who painted Obama's portrait also painted this picture of a powerful black woman beheading a white woman.

If it's supposed to represent Judith beheading Holofernes, the victim here is the wrong gender.

Fabi said...

Suggested portrait titles:

"Manspreading in the Garden"
"Still Life with Bedspread"

mockturtle said...

So the artist who painted Obama's portrait also painted this picture of a powerful black woman beheading a white woman.

And just imagine the outrage were Trump to select an artist who had portrayed a white beheading a black.

David said...

Fabi said...
Suggested portrait titles:

"Manspreading in the Garden"
"Still Life with Bedspread"


Excellent!

buwaya said...

"If it's supposed to represent Judith beheading Holofernes, the victim here is the wrong gender."

If a 19th century Frenchman had done it, the head would have been that of a Babylonian and not a woman of course. And he would have done a much better background.

But the figure of the avenging black woman can stay as is, it is done quite well.

Freeman Hunt said...

Looking through all the official portraits.

Kennedy seems to be the first that doesn't match the others, but it is, at least, well done. After that it looks like everyone in America forgot how to paint, or no one could be found who could paint as well as artists of the past, with the possible exceptions of whoever did the portraits for Ford and Carter. Reagan's looks nothing like him at all.

Freeman Hunt said...

I don't think Thomas Jefferson's portrait has ever been surpassed. Garfield's is especially good though.

MountainMan said...

After looking at all the presidential portraits I would have to say there will now definitely be one that does not belong with all the others.

Freeman Hunt said...

Go to the third one. Martha Jefferson?!

And no info for it. This one needs explanation.

Freeman Hunt said...

I strongly prefer the look of real life Michelle Obama to this portrait that is supposedly of Michelle Obama.

MountainMan said...

I’ve always liked the portrait of Grace Coolidge.

Lewis Wetzel said...

"The "engaged and assertive demeanor" of Obama in his portrait "contradicts — and cosmetically corrects — the impression he often made in office of being philosophically detached from what was going on around him.""
There has never been a substantive critique of Obama's persona from the Left. They had too much emotional involvement in his success as Obama the Black man to honestly assess his personality.
For "philosophically detached" read "alienated." Obama was a person with only the most tenuous connection to mainstream American culture, and this connection was through the branch of academia and law that deals in civil rights. This is the branch most alienated from the American main stream identity. It is at war with those who are not alienated from American culture.
When a person who is alienated from American society wants to change American society, he wants to change what "you" value, not what "we" value.
The people who opposed Obama's policies were the real "resistance."
Kim Davis, who resisted giving marriage certificates to same sex couples in Weat Virginia, is the real resistance. She is not attractive, she appeared on no awards shows, she was endlessly and cruelly mocked for her looks, her lack of education, and her religion. If you ever thought of giving a penny to the ACLU, remember that the ACLU wanted Davis removed from office, humiliated, and jailed if she refused to comply.

Breezy said...

I think the likeness of Obama is good. Its too bad the artist liked painting the foliage more than the man. The foliage is loose and relaxed - not he though. The green has taking over the canvas, like a bad rash. And his shoes are not grounded. Go figure. Hello, this was a President!

Michelle must be fuming that her portrait does not look like her. I would be. She actually has very distinctive features and the artist did not find them. I love the dress though, and the overall simplicity of the portrait in general.

And, did he really say she was "hot"? Seriously - is he in high school? Let's keep the ego salves to yourselves. Honestly, its a show of maturity to keep those thoughts to yourself.

Achilles said...

Did the Obama's not look at the portraits before they were released?

It really looks like someone played a joke on them.

lucy white said...

I like mine more.

"The Curse" (January 20, 2009 – January 20, 2017)
#ObamaPortrait made of concentrated (crimson) watercolor on Kotex ultra thin pantiliner *includes a hint of aloe & Vitamin E!

lucy white said...

Saint Croix said..."this is way better, I think"

That is a damn fine portrait. Who is the artist?

Rusty said...

It looks as though the underbrush is slowly swallowing him up,Obama.
We can hope.

Sarah Rolph said...

"It's that the face is such a small part of the thing and it doesn't look like her."

And also, it's a really bad painting. I was shocked. It looks like something you would see in a student art competition.

Steven Wilson said...

Kim Davis was in Kentucky but would have fit in my neighboring state of West Virginia. Lewis Wetzel's comment is otherwise dead on. She was the resistance and the ACLU had no interest in defending her. They had to virtue signal and found it especially easy to do when the collateral damage was a plain middle aged woman soon to be reclassified as a "deplorable."

Gahrie said...

Did the Obama's not look at the portraits before they were released?

It really looks like someone played a joke on them.


These portraits are the Obamas' idea of a joke on the American people.

Saint Croix said...

That is a damn fine portrait. Who is the artist?

Edwin van den Dikkenberg

Bad Lieutenant said...

How is it a joke by the Obamas on us? They look like s***. Who thinks it's funny for themselves to look awful? I guess this is one of those situations then where everybody wins. The laughingstocks.