Going through some old photos this morning, I came upon this snapshot of an oil painting that was “borrowed” from the art department wall of a now defunct sign company in Saskatoon at around the time I ended work there… (The name of the company was A.G. Neon Art.)
I did the piece as a teenager (from a magazine photo), and while it has no actual value, I’d still like it back. If one of you in this relatively large audience has spotted it in your travels, please send me an email (or mail to the address here). It’s a longshot, but you never know.
I’m not interested in anything more than the painting’s return – so no questions asked.
If someone stole it, obviously they thought it had some sort of value.
Reminds me of Ken Danby’s style.
Beat me to it! I thought for a sec you’d found a Danby in a yard sale! Wow.
it says holy crap how did that get by me.
“Reminds me of Ken Danby’s style.”
Oddly enough…
Jerry Cheevers right?
If nothing else I bet HE would like it on his wall. Check his place 😉
Very nice work!
Cheevers wore a number in the 30’s. Love the work of Ken Danby, “At the Crease” one of my favorites, proved to a hockey mad kid that art had some value.
Art snobs in Canada used to say Danby, Colville, Bateman were “illustrators,not artists”.
Whatever, I’ll take any one of theirs over “Voice of Fire” or “Piss Pope”, any day.
It’s Gilles Gilbert (not Gerry Cheevers).
I have that very same sweater, but with number 4 on it.
Whaddya mean no value! That’s a great piece!
That sure of hell has a LOT more artistic merit than that dumbass painting of a red stripe that the boneheads at the National gallery wasted 1.8 million of our tax dollars on!
Yes, it’s Gilles Gilbert.
We all liked Bobby in our own way, didn’t we Matt. Great job, Kate.
You can paint like THAT and you spend your time doing goalie masks instead?!?
When God gives you a talent like that you’re supposed to USE it, you know.
Cripes.
Ah Kate you answered the ? of who before i could agree with Matt. Mindya i had to cheat & google Bruins Goalies because i could not remember his #. I knew it was not Cheevers going by the mask minus the stitches.
Google jerry cheevers there is a comical story on how the stitches started at wilkepedia.
“…while it has no actual value,…
BWAHAHAHA! The way you’re going hon, an early Kate McMillan may hardly be said to have “no actual value”… That’s an investment that might be worth making… (did I ever tell you about the time back in the ’70s when my ex wouldn’t let me buy a signed, authenticated Norval Morriseau at a mall “gallery” store for about $50, about 2 years before he was “discovered” by the Tranna “art” community?}
Danby I met at his place outside of Guelph when friends of ours had the farm next door. He was already a kitsch artist then… Sadly, you Kate, I’ve never met, something I hope I’m fortunate enough to rectify some day. Suggest an invite to Mike Coren’s new regular blogger feature on his show and get him to fly you down to Burlington. I’ll at the very least treat you to dinner after his show.
Kate:
Are you sure it’s Gilles Gilbert? Gilbert wore 35 when he played with Minnesota. I think it might be Eddie Johnston (he wore number 1), good enough to be on the 72 Summit Series Team and with the Bruins for 10 years until the mid-70s. A rock solid goalie.
If you look carefully, you can see the letter “T” on the back of his right shoulder.
Okay, I just found a picture of Gilles Gilbert in a Boston Bruins uniform wearing #1. However the mask is a bit different – but that doesn’t mean much. It could be Gilbert.
sub:
eddie wore #1 too but he wore a totaly different mask, just google boston bruins goalies you will see the site that shows all of there goalies click the name.
Besides Kate has confirmed that is who it is.
It is very clearly Gilees Gilbert.
as a Bruins fan, it is likely after the Flower scored his goal with “Too many men on the ice”.. the goal that made Mr. Cherry famous/infamous.
Matt,
I am happy you have the same sweater with #4 on it. Bobby is the GREATEST hockey player ever.
To use a ’90’s phrse, HE DA MAN.
Ken
same mask, I vote with Kate , its Gilbert
http://www.hockeygoalies.org/bio/gilbert.html
Further on what skip said:
Hell, Kate, if you’re ever in Calgary, the wife and I will treat you to dinner, just ’cause. 😉
Garth
Wow, excellent art work Kate. I am mightily impressed. Would you be open to doing custom work on canvas?
I see a huge market here in the hockey mom and dad demographic. Actually, anyone would be proud to own one of your pieces.
I’d like a portrait of Ezra with, “What Would Ezra Do?” painted on it. That’s way more powerful to me than those silly motivational posters you see in offices.
…and here I thought I was doing good with paint by numbers.
Just couldn’t stay within the lines eh.
Kate, that one’s MUCH better than the one of the tits-up rodent on your logo.
Do I imagine a canine audience behind the glass?
tomax7
I tried that once, but got stumped after 10!!!!
should have stayed in school longer:-)))))
Ah, that reminds me of the near-perfect replica pencil crayon poster I did in my last year in elementary school of a book cover for a book report. I was told by family members, after finishing it, that I spent about 24 hours on it. Told, because I had no idea how much time passed. I was 13 and it was my best work to that date.
At the end of the year, I came by to pick it up from the classroom (it was on display), and it was gone. Teacher said she didn’t know anything about it, but the way she said it suggested that she was either the one that took it, or knew who did but didn’t feel like dealing with the trouble of righting the wrong.
Gah, I would’ve been better off not remembering that particular year, especially that teacher. Not because of that — that was just icing on the cake. Suffice it to say that she was my first non-family influence in hating lefties.
Your attention to detail is exquisite….just like with your dogs.
Deb
“Kate, that one’s MUCH better than the one of the tits-up rodent on your logo.”
He is not breasts-up. He is sleeping. Thats what my Dad told me. Now if I shot him with my BB gun – then he’d really be breasts-up.
Hunter
Must…resist…temptation…to post Parrot Sketch link. Phew, that was close!
Wow! Kate…I hope you get it back…I thought Danby immediately.
Speaking of culture …I wonder if Danby, Colville and Bateman were ever on the receiving end of federal money from Hertage Canada.
Part of me thinks they deserve it, and then I realise their work and success did not need propping by our tax money….just like Kate.
wow…artistic talent is not in my vocabulary, hell, my stickmen don’t look like stickmen.
I have that very same sweater, but with number 4 on it.
Posted by: Mississauga Matt
If I recall correctly, #4 didn’t have a lot of respect for goalies…..of course I was just a child, what do I know.
…and here I thought I was doing good with paint by numbers.
Just couldn’t stay within the lines eh
tomax – for us wannabe’s the numbers are for color direction, the willingness to go outside the lines (a little bit) is “artistic expression”. That’s our talent coming out, no-talent bums stay inside the lines…
Kate – katewerk convinced me of your talent. Nobody gets that kind of work if the aren’t good at it. I’d love to see your version of the kind of things that Redlin does. You seem to have a lot of the same grounding that he does. Your work, as his, actually looks like what its supposed to be. I don’t have to try to see what you are “thinking” in your art. It looks like what it is.
“delisle water tower at sunset”
“karmarks house/yard at dawn”
“delisle bar at closing, with myron”
some titles I can think of.
“git er done…”
While we hate each others politics Kate, I have to say that I like your art and in particular I LOVE that piece. When you said, “…. and while it has no actual value …” – I STRONGLY disagree. The piece is a wonderful expression of Canadian life. It is beautiful and I hope that you get more aggressive in you efforts to reclaim it. I coached Midget hockey for a number of years (ages 16 & 17) and that piece total captures an aspect of Canada’s game. Good luck in your quest for it. I certainly hope that you get it back!
Speaking as an oldtimers’ league goalie, if you do get it back will you issue prints?
What I find most interesting about Kate’s painting is the look of grime that washes over it. Did she, toward its completion, pour dishwater over it? If so, it was an inpired touch. This is not an idealized portrait of Canadian life. For that, go to Danby’s work.
I find Kate’s more interesting and, in a deeper way, more “realistic”.
Incidentally, when I say that Kate’s goalie portrait, rendered as it is in a grimy palette, is more “realistic” than Danby’s, I do not mean that it is fashionably defeatist. On the contrary, I think it is actually heroic in a way that Danby’s portrait is not. Life is often brown and gray, but I get the feeling that Kate’s goalie will finish the game no matter what. With Danby’s goalie, finishing the game is not even a question. He looks more like Darth Vadar, a robot, not a human being, who moves in planetary sunlight. He is a sure thing and therefore not even close to being heroic.
Dear Idiot;
The image shown is a scan of a photo that I took shortly after the painting was finished. The shot was taken indoors, without a flash, with a cheap camera. I was a kid, eh?
Since then, the single print (about 2 1/2″ wide) has been sitting around in a pile of other old photos. It hasn’t aged well.
Now, kindly sod off before I hunt you down and rub your nose in it further.
Kate:
I was responding to the image I saw on the screen, without considering its history, of which I was only partially aware. Judging from your vehemence, you seem to think I was making fun of you, as though in a parody of some kind. I was not. I sincerely admired the image that I saw on the screen. I really thought that that was the way the painting looked, and I liked what I saw.
Perhaps, however, you are angered by my apparent dismissal of an artist you admire. If that is the case, surely you can advance a counter view in a way that respects the person with whom you disagree. If my view of Danby’s painting is misguided, tell me why. I’m not closed to discussion.
At this point, I took your comments to be sarcastic insult.
“Did she, toward its completion, pour dishwater over it?”
If I misinterpreted, I apologize. But the original painting is not “grimy”. I put up the only image I had in the remote chance it will help me to get it back. Nothing more.
Good enough. Thank you. I hope you get the painting back.
Kate, why not put the photo up for sale on eBay and donate the proceeds to the libel defence fund you are involved in.
I would start the bidding at a hundred dollars.
What do you say?
Bart: “the willingness to go outside the lines (a little bit) is ‘artistic expression'”.
Oh Cool! So Mom WAS wrong in spanking me when I drew on the walls…
…hmm, this explains why I go into a cold sweat whenever I see a Crayola thingy.
I know my Canadian artists, heck, I can even list all ten members of the Group of Seven. With that minimal pedigree, I have to say, that painting is the work of a very talented artist. Hope that there has been a lot more art produced over the years.
…Kate should be listed as one of Canada’s hidden treasures, great artist and painter.
Two different things if my memory serves me right.