We recently had a thread that mentioned paint by numbers kits, which made me look up a few of these. They are definitely still around.
But it made me think of a line from Mystery Science Theater. In episode 419 (“The Rebel Set” – I don’t remember this; I had to look it up online) Joel’s half of the invention exchange was coming up with a “Mark Rothko Paint by Number”. In case you’re a nyekulturny philistine like me who didn’t get the joke (except by doping it out in context), Rothko was a “Field Color” painter. whose canvases featured large rectangles done in single color
It’s a joke, though, right? Nobody would actually make and sell a Mark Rothko paint by number would they?
Don’t ask a question like that. It would be seen as a challenge.
They did, of course
Well,heck, if you can do Rothko, then you ought to be able to do Piet Mondrian, too, right?
Right
Well, once you’ve done that, nothing’s going to stop Georges Seurat, is it? Le Grande Jatte, of course, since nobody knows any of his other paintings
Pointillisme , it seems, was made for paint by number.
What about Jacson Polloock? This one seems to be a deliberate joke:
Here’s my PBN story. I was on a team working in Prague and met someone at the embassy who was a serious painter. I mentioned that I also dabbled and she gave me a sidelong look that surprised me. A couple of days later, several of us are sitting in a local pub and she turns to me and says:
“Okay, you said you paint, right?”
“Yup.”
“And when you say paint, what do you mean by that?”
“Ummm. . .well, a blank canvas, tubes of paint, brushes, knives, etc.”
“So you are actually mixing paints and starting with a fresh canvas?”
“Y-e-a-hhh; what other way is there?”
So then she tells me a story about a guy who was at the embassy who she became friends with, who told her that he was a painter. And he talked painting like he really knew the art form inside-out, and impressed her with his knowledge of technique and subject matter. After a couple of months of this, she asked him what he was currently working on, and he said “four paintings depicting the different seasons”. She said she’d love to see them, thinking the relationship might go further based on their mutual love of the art. So he said sure, and brought in his “paintings” to show her, and yep, they were PBN, and not very well executed at that. Her comment to him was “well, you certainly stayed within the lines.”
The Mondrian is right up my alley. Not too fiddly, they give me the colors and tell me where to paint them, it’s a work I’d actually want on my wall, and I might not make a complete mess of it.
I think this is a repeat of what I’ve said in another thread. My first ‘mapping’ job was to hand paint with oil on canvas geomorphic maps. Basically soil types. They where very detailed (4/0 brushes), one map could take weeks to complete and sold for many thousands of dollars to oil companies.
This was WAY before we had large format printers of course.
It was paint by number. And the product was very cool looking. An abstract.
When I first got the job, I thought that it was the coolest job ever. And I had a key to the building! I could work when every I wanted! I soon found out why. It was the most mind numbing job I have ever had. But you had to be very meticulous.
With that said, I did find PBN lots of fun when I was a child. I can completely see the attraction to it. It’s a little bit like making a puzzle. It’s satisfying to see the progress.
