The image of a political movement?

It’s rare to find artists who openly allign their works with a conservative political stance, and so when one shows up, I take notice.

This morning I received in my inbox an email from “RPR News” stating artist Meg Michael of Princeton, New Jersey, is offering professional copies of one of her paintings at a “greatly reduced price” ($290) to “serve as an ideal symbol for the new movement dedicated to a reformed conservative government.”

So what might this painting depict? My mind immediately conjured up images of protestors from the colonial days dumping crates of tea into the Boston harbor, or perhaps a large pig about to go under the butcher’s knife (as in “we need to slash the pork from this bill”). But alas, nothing so bold. Take a look:

teaparty_painting1.jpg

Meg Michael’s “Tea Party”

The press release goes on to say that Michael’s painting “is intended as an apt common focus for loyal tea party members who wish to emphasize their power of unity and to encourage active party participation.”

I’m sorry, but I believe the last work of art that’s going to inspire “active party participation” is a still-life.

  • robert Sindelir

    Without regard to political content, $290 may seem to her like a “greatly reduced price” for a “professional copy” of a painting the artist may particularly prize. However, a real professional copy would be a copy of a painting, painted by a professional painter. A mechanically produced image of a painting, of any kind, is a reproduction, even if it is an expensively done giclee print on canvas, archival paper or even on real vellum torn from some poor sheep’s body. My guess is that it is exactly this (a giclee reproduction) that is being offered. Let’s hear it for truth in advertising to protect poor, unsuspecting potential buyers.