
For Kirk Richards, good painting is about balancing
truth and beauty
By Gretchen
Reynolds
If you wish to
become a classical realist painter, it’s an advantage to have
grown up in a place like Amarillo, TX, in the 1960s—although
this may not have been evident at the time. As Kirk Richards,
52, one of the West’s most accomplished classical realists,
remembers Amarillo back then, it was
not filled with artistic ferment. “Amarillo
is a city with a strong work ethic,” Richards says, “and back
then, it was filled with ranchers and farmers, who are really
practical, hard-working people.” Amarillo
and its citizens didn’t have much time or patience for the
arts at the time.
Richards’ family
fit into this Amarillo nicely. “My father
was a lawyer,” Richards says. “His father was a lawyer. Almost
all of the men in my family, for generations, had been
lawyers.” One of his aunts, Claire Richards, was a classical
pianist who became the head of the piano department at the
University of Illinois. But as a boy,
Richards had few other artistic role models. “In my high
school, art classes meant ceramics or jewelry making,” he
recounts. “No one was very interested in painting.” Except
Richards. On his own, he sketched and painted in the hours
after school, because he enjoyed it and because he’d
discovered that he had talent. But he received little guidance
or encouragement.
Then one day, a
teenage Richards stumbled on a book of Michelangelo’s
paintings at the local library—and discovered his métier. “I
wanted to paint like that,” he says. “Of course, I had no idea
how to paint like that, or even what to call paintings like
his. But I knew that’s what I wanted to do.”
And he has, in his
way. Though not a pure acolyte of Michelangelo-style
classicism, he has found a way to meld the formal beauty of
what he saw in the art book that day with the workaday,
plainspoken concerns of Amarillo, where he still
lives. He creates classically inspired images of everyday
lives and objects. He has manifested the art that has always
been resident—if not apparent—in Amarillo.
The term classical
realism sounds ancient and pedigreed, as if art critics have
been applying it to paintings for centuries. They haven’t.
Classical realism is a relatively new phrase, coined only in
the 1980s. And it describes not an old-fashioned style of
painting but a very modern approach to old-fashioned imagery.
“Classical realism
is fundamentally an oxymoron,” Richards proposes. “Classicism
involves idealized images, often from the Roman or Greek
iconography, or religious images. It’s about a formal, even
heroic kind of beauty.” Think Michelangelo or Raphael.
Realism, if not
the polar opposite of classicism, is at least a hemisphere
away. “Realism is about faithfully rendered, unidealized
images,” Richards says. It’s slice-of-life iconography, images
of everyday people in their living rooms or workplaces. This
is what you see in the work of Caravaggio or Vermeer or, in
more modern times, the Boston School of painters such
as William Paxton, whose canvases show poignant, naturalistic
scenes of families in their homes.
Classical realism is a modern-day attempt to combine
the two traditions, to join the idealized, formal beauty and
order of classicism with the faithful representation of
sometimes messy scenarios that is realism. In classical
realism, everyday scenes of families or workers are composed
with a formal rigor, and images that have the cool order of
classicism are laced with the ardor, the life of naturalism.
Classical realism
thus requires a good eye and a good mind. The classical
realist must be able to edit the image he sees before him.
“Classical realism is not photo-realism,” Richards points out.
“It’s not about showing every pore or every flaw. It’s about
balancing the absolute, complete truth of what you see with
the beauty of what you want to put onto the canvas.”
Richards came to
his interest in classical realism rather late in his formal
artistic education. After high school, he enrolled at
Amarillo College, where he first
began to study art. From there, he transferred to West
Texas State University for both
bachelor’s and master’s degrees in painting. It was at
West Texas that he was
introduced to the concept, seemingly obvious, of painting from
life. “As a boy, I drew things from my imagination or maybe
copied other paintings,” Richards remembers. He was captivated
now by the process of setting up still lifes or posing models.
“There’s an incredible joy to painting from life,” he
observes.
But the joy
couldn’t quell his growing sense that, even as he learned more
about painting, he had yet to find his particular style. “I
finished my master’s degree,” he recounts, “but I knew I was
still nowhere close to being ready to be a professional
artist.”
About that time,
he saw an article in an arts magazine profiling the painter
and teacher Richard Lack of Minneapolis, MN. This was in 1976. By
then, Lack was practicing and championing the style of
painting that would come to be called classical realism.
Almost on a whim, Richards contacted Lack, who spoke to the
young man at length. Enthused, Richards sent samples of his
work, was accepted into Lack’s extremely competitive atelier
(a kind of postgraduate program for serious artists), and
moved to Minneapolis for four years.
“It was there that I learned to paint the way that I really
wanted to paint,” Richards says.
What Lack
emphasized, and Richards still practices today, is a
thoughtful approach to painting, supported by a sturdy
foundation of craft, or what Richards calls “authoritative
draftsmanship.” In his four years with Lack, Richards learned,
he says, “the essentials—the ability to see, draw, and render,
to understand form and shape, to see color correctly. We were
taught a steadfast devotion to color truth, to capturing the
right note of color.” This was combined with education in the
fundamentals of strong design.
The goal, Richards
adds, was—and remains in his work today—a “completed
painting.” By this, he means a painting that is fully,
deliberately realized, that has no sense of sketchiness, of
rush. “Trained painters know that an unfinished look, a
sketchlike look, can hide a multitude of sins,
inconsistencies, and incompetencies. I want my paintings to
have a deep sense of completeness. I like a finished, resolved
image, not a sketch.”
This does not mean
that his paintings are overworked. The oils all have a richly
pigmented surface, enlivened by the flows and swirls of
skilled brushwork. “What I hope is that my paintings look
complete from a distance, but as you move closer, the
interesting surface becomes clear,” he says.
Richards’ oeuvre tends to prompt
a viewer’s desire to move closer. His subject matter is the
quotidian world of the Southwest—the flora, the fauna, and the
workaday lives of the people. Perhaps best known for his still
lifes, often of carefully shaded flowers, he also paints
commissioned portraits and uncannily revealing slice-of-life
scenes of southwestern life. “I like to think that I’ve
adapted the Boston School sensibility to
the Southwest,” he says. Not a typical western painter—he
eschews historic studies of cowboys and Indians or wildlife in
full flight—he has nonetheless painted modern Native American
potters at work and once carefully rendered a mountain lion.
The lion was stuffed and on a pedestal, all of which is shown
in his painting.
Always, if
possible, he works from life. “I dislike using photographs,”
he says. This stubborn adherence to life has its drawbacks,
though. Flower petals, for instance, wilt and die over the
course of several months, which is about how long Richards
takes to complete a typical painting. “I try to rough in the
general shape before that happens,” he says. “Then I replace
the dead flowers. I think about how the original flowers
looked at the start, how the light plays off of them now. I
think about what it is that I need to remember, what I can
forget, and then I continue.”
In this process,
an astute viewer can get insight into the essence of Richards’
art. It is about truth, but not slavish truth. “I have, I
hope, learned to see nature in a particular way, to use my
brain to find what’s important and essential and what is not,”
he says. “Too much information tends to break up the unified
vision of a painting. Painting realistically is more than the
accumulation of detail. A painting is like an ensemble—all the
pieces have to work together, without competing for attention.
My paintings are about a reality that is more visual than
actual.”
Today, on any
given day, Richards can be found in the airy, 20-by-20-foot
studio attached to his Amarillo home, natural light
flooding through its north-facing windows. “I paint every day
that I’m home,” he says. He’ll assiduously study a still life
or reposition a group of models, honing his particular
artistic view of life, incorporating the precision of his
lawyer forebears and yet tempering it with a respect for the
fragility and loveliness of evanescent life. “I believe that
all great art is representational,” he contends. “It
communicates an idea. I’m not a fan of modern art that speaks
only to the artist and a small group of his followers. That’s
not what I want to do. I want my work to speak to people.”
What it tells them is that there is great and lasting beauty
in ordinary things, a truth that any son of Amarillo,
of course, knows.
Santa Fe-based
Gretchen Reynolds contributes frequently to The New York Times
Magazine; O, The Oprah Magazine; and National Geographic
Adventure.
Richards is
represented by Tree’s Place, Orleans,
MA. |