Elizabeth Peyton — painter of celebrities, celebrity painter. Is there much more to be said? Now in her mid-40s, this native New Yorker has acquired such a reputation for her wan little portraits of pop stars, art stars, dealers and collectors that her society status appears almost indivisible from theirs.
In a sense, Peyton is the painterly equivalent of photographers like Wolfgang Tillmans and Juergen Teller, so completely a part of the very world they record for magazines as well as art museums. And in fact she also takes, and exhibits, photos of her friends; Marc Jacobs, Chloe Sevigny, Matthew Barney, Olafur Eliasson, faces skimmed from social occasions. The curator of a recent show called these somewhat insouciant (and often poorly exposed) shots “acts of devotion,” which is striking precisely because this is the exact claim people always make for her paintings.
But the question raised by the paintings, as opposed to the photographs, is how can one possibly tell?
Peyton’s portraits sound like a fan’s visions, sure enough. Liam and Noel Gallagher imagined in their Sunday best on their mum’s sofa; Liam in violet-blue shadow; Liam in flowers; Jarvis delicately offering Liam a light. Kurt Cobain in white, as a child, with his favorite cat, as a blanched and beautiful face — not too far from reality.
All these paintings are based on spreads from NME, Rolling Stone and so forth. The translation into oil paint involves flattening, cropping and a kind of whimsical simplification, not so radical that the star is no longer recognizable, nor so streamlined you could really call it stylish. The main effect is simply of homogeneity. All these famous figures — no matter how individual, how young or old, solitary, tormented, cheerful or gregarious, no matter what profession or sex — share a family resemblance. They all look like Elizabeth Peytons.
Which means weightless, elfin, sharp-nosed, heads slightly too big for skimpy bodies, women as waifs, men as lost boys. It is the same only more so in Peyton’s gamine self-portraits. Thin as paint, the paint itself washy and dilute, her figures look too weak to peel a grape. And the pictures they appear in are so small, not much bigger than a magazine shot, as to imply a certain candid intimacy.
But if someone told you Peyton’s cute little picture of Sid Vicious and his dear old mum was actually ironic, you could so easily believe it. Or her pictures of Queen Elizabeth II as a winsome teenager: mightn’t these be deliberately kitsch? Does she really and indiscriminately revere Mad King Ludwig of Bavaria, Prince Harry and Oscar Wilde’s treacherous lover Bosie?
These three appear in paintings but also in drawings — Peyton’s great forte — with more than a hint of Max Beerbohm in their elegant and witty concision. And not just Beerbohm, but Ingres, Holbein and David Hockney; so perhaps it is here that one finds the true act of devotion, not to mention humor.
The paintings, on the other hand, are weedy, with their drips and mimsy swipes. The palette runs from chalk-white to vampirical scarlet and purple. Sometimes the paint is laid on in thin brown smears reminiscent of nothing so much as dirty protests, sometimes in a paste that lies on the board like tile grout. Reproductions don’t convey these nasty sensations.