Arthur Getz was a cover artist for the New Yorker back in the days when the magazine used the cover to show poetic moods of the city.
A contributor to the magazine for over 50 years, Getz produced 213 covers, more than any other artist. For each of them he developed many sketches and often multiple final original paintings.
He used a variety of media. According to Walt Reed, "early covers were painted in encaustic (or rather casein tempera), subsequently he used ink, watercolor, casein, or tempera."
According to the New Yorker's 1996 obituary, "He was a compact, barrel-chested man with the level gaze and scraggy beard of an Amish farmer..."
"He was a natural teacher, and was generous in his response to the work of others. Many New Yorker artists still cherish notes of encouragement they received from him early in their careers."
----
Arthur Getz in the blog Lines and Colors
The Illustrator in America: 1860-2000
Covering the New Yorker: Cutting-Edge Covers from a Literary Institution
Another learning moment. Pigments in wax?!?!? I cannot imagine that would be remotely easy. My mind can't even go there.
ReplyDeleteI'm the daughter of the late Arthur Getz. Thanks for this wonderful blog, James! And Penny, I think Walter Reed might have been misquoted. My father's early NYKR covers were almost all casein tempera.
ReplyDeleteS. Getz, so glad to hear from you, and thanks for clearing up that question about encaustic. I made the appropriate edit to the post. I have no idea where that came from, but casein tempera makes a lot more sense. If you have other stories or insights into your dad's thinking about art or his working methods, please share them with me by email (see the left column of the blog), and I can work them into a future post.
ReplyDeletePenny, so that answers your puzzlement as well. Encaustic is a wonderful medium from what I know, but I had a hard time imagining Mr. Getz using it.
And it continues to be a learning experience. Love it. Thank you, Ms. Getz. I love, love, love your father's work. And thank you, James.
ReplyDelete