Friday 20 September 2013

It seems that the article on the art of Rev Siphuncle has stimulated our readers to come forth with their own sightings of paintings by the man who painted them. I'll devote the rest of this post to the emails that have recently arrived in my computer.

Here is a painting sent to me by Ironic Thrust. He writes. Yes. Here he goes:




























"This delightul painting was found at the back of my attic under a pair of three things. Could it be a genuine Siphuncle masterpiece, or is it a genuine fake? A crayonic scrawl on the back of the canvas says that the image depicts an ancient puppy who, after engorging itself on sperm and sherbet dib-dabs, has taken to the sea and rapidly evolved into the creature that you see depicted. Enraged with thoughts of never being able to chase tennis balls again, it grabs the first alternative it can find - a clipper bound for Nantucket. On board the clipper are some idiots and a cargo of Tesco Finest mould.
I believe the picture above is actually displayed incorrectly. It should be rotated anti-clockwise by 89 degrees. The water is held up by Blu-tack and/or Gloy.
Do you think it is worth anything?"

Do I think it is worth anything? Well thanks for sending that one in Ironic Thrust and better luck next time. It does indeed look like a genuine. It's an interesting story about the painting but I personally believe that this is an ironic self-portrait of the artist and the scene represents his desire to be a metaphor for a whale.



What's next? This is next. Next now. An hemail from my good friend Mr and Mrs Vernon Atrium who has sent another picture with an excellent description. He really is. 

"Self-Portrait In Which I Do Not Appear (composed and painted on a Tuesday, final retouching on the afternoon of Epiphany, 1956pm)"







































"One of a series of self-portraits, arranged posthumously by critics into Siphuncle's 'Drippy Black' period, in which the artist would imagine himself as others saw him and commence to paint the exact opposite. The resemblance is quite uncanny, although the pair of studded cups behind the central figure do resemble cans, vaguely. Also apparent is Siphuncle's love of chicken wire, in the circular fenĂȘtre de la cloche-end monstrueux to the upper-right. For Siphuncle, chicken wire symbolised the human condition in its starkest form and he would often refer to it in conversation, replacing words such as, 'love', 'terror', 'bravery' and 'food' with, 'chicken wire'.
The central figure is shown holding a chain of paper-clips - Siphuncle's cunning hint that we are not regarding a genuine Renaissance portrait. See also his Symbiotic Goat of Malmo from the same series, where the central, two-headed figure is shown licking an ashtray full of staples. Finally, Siphuncle once again shows his disdain for painting hair - hence the 'drippy black' atop the figure's head. "I hate hair," Siphuncle is quoted as saying, almost constantly, to anyone who would listen. "Hair is the coiled wyrm of Satan's spasmodic bowel come to life in this vile world of failure." Despite this vindictive attitude, the artist was, towards the end of his lives, frequently asked to endorse several ranges of hair-care products, such as; Head n' Shoulders, Pant N and Laurel's 'Because We Want Your Money, Ugly' collection of antique chemical scalp burns."

I think Mr and Mrs Atrium has and have explained this perfectly well. Fanoire, as many who will have read my booklet 'The Life and Works of Rev Fanoire Siphuncle' (ISBN 2938479238) will know as well that his phobia of hair resulted in him going bald voluntarily in his birthday year. His good friend and enemy Dr Spadix Grotesque stole the hair and took it to the police who, after investigation imprisoned Rev Siphuncle for hours. They later released him on condition that he would go away. Which he did.

A well kept secret about this painting is that the gentleman depicted in the picture was actually Luigi Lisa the brother of the Mona Lisa. The two men looked so alike that it was easy to convince those that he had appeared in a portrait in which he had not appeared. At last some clarity!

In the next post I will present another find from Mr and Mrs Vernon Atrium. Until then better luck next time!



No comments:

Post a Comment