Comments on: Victoria Reynolds’ Paintings of Meat

By: Mahmoud

Mahmoud — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 17:47:07 +0000

Victoria Reynolds was my art teacher last year..she was so nice teacher

By: Véro

Véro — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 19:49:17 +0000

I would like to make a slight adjustment to my previous comment. Let us understand that it applies mostly to Flight of the raindeer and other earlier work. In the last years, Victoria Reynolds has given a truly realistic twist to her paintings, in a way that there are no mistakes to be made about the fate of the owner of the parts depicted, raindeers mostly. Although is makes her art this much less accessible, and a lot harder to view by some, it retains a strong sense of beauty. What could have been seen as a poetic essay in Flight of the raindeer is now a cold tale of butchery in Raindeer slope, and has a scientific taste in Uteral bonnet. And I believe it all makes her work this mush stronger. Much less accessible, but just as effective.

By: Véro

Véro — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 19:24:52 +0000

Flight of the raindeer is, I believe, one of the best paintings Victoria Reynolds has blessed our world with. It is technically strong and brings the viewers to ask themselves a lot of questions, and that is, in essence, the true purpose of art. It is not so the subject of Miss reynolds’s paintings that throws us off, but what we believe may have happenned before the shot was taken. In fact, these paintings are nothing nore than peaceful depictions of something we are not used to see in that light. There is no violence to the subject but the one that we put there ourselves. The animals we think of when viewing such paintings may not not have died the painful death our brains tell us they did; they might in fact still be alive, and what we are seeing is the dance animating them fom the inside. It all depends on what we think before we see the paintings. The making of art is a work of the heart, truly, and its appreciation is a work of the mind. Chapeau, Miss Reynolds.

By: Shele

Shele — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 22:18:23 +0000

Victoria is a fabulous painter. She does not kill animals just to paint them. Instead she makes herself available when animals are being slaughtered for food and takes pictures. Or, she might purchase meat or fish at the local meat market for her subjects. I took a painting class from her and although she might be considered a bit of an odd ball, she is not crazy, nor does she disect animals at her kitchen table.

By: Erika

Erika — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 14:14:26 +0000

These paintings are technically very good but lead to questions regarding the sanity of the painter. Why would anyone want to put their consciousness so much on the destruction of a life, of a body? I hope that dissections on the kitchen table of hapless animal victims are not contributing to this. I, along with I hope many others, will never purchase this type of art. When we look at our walls we want to see something beautiful and inspirational not the remains of something that was violently forced from life before it’s natural time.

By: David

David — Tue, 15 May 2007 04:15:19 +0000

Looks like a cat turned inside-out to me. I suppose you can call this art.

By: tim

tim — Fri, 11 May 2007 20:42:13 +0000

Those are great. They’re priced pretty high, but then again they’re actual paint, not inkjet er “giclee” so they’re one of a kind. Maybe when I win the lottery I can afford such things.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 11 May 2007 18:09:03 +0000

That painting looks vaguely naughty.

By: Susie

Susie — Fri, 11 May 2007 17:52:09 +0000

Amazing. I would hang one of these in any room. It almost makes me want another corned beef sandwich (what i just had for lunch).