[www.ronniewoodsetlists.com]

Before every show and during each rehearsal, Ronnie paints a large canvas depicting the setlist of that night’s show or a record of what’s worked on. These sometimes include a nod to the location of the gig or an illustration of a particular song. The results are fascinating insights into moments in time within the greatest rock n roll band in the world.

I kinda like the Cuba one.

jb

Just pre-ordered a Twickenham.
One of my favorite shows of all time, loved everything about it
Wouldn't have sprung for an original, but these lithos are a great way to relive some moments and the size (18 x 24) is nice.

They remind me of children's doodle art or coloring books - way overpriced, and to be quite frank, they're gaudy and ugly.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

I find them charming. I might go for one if he had a show I attended available.

~"Love is Strong"~

Quote
Hairball
They remind me of children's doodle art or coloring books - way overpriced, and to be quite frank, they're gaudy and ugly.

you're so right. And thank you for speaking out the truth – so that I don't have to do this.

Quote
slewan

Quote
Hairball
They remind me of children's doodle art or coloring books - way overpriced, and to be quite frank, they're gaudy and ugly.

you're so right. And thank you for speaking out the truth – so that I don't have to do this.

Um...
They're setlists guys, not fine art. Setlists.
A difficult concept to grasp I see for you art aficionados.

As a matter of fact, some kids (his) have doodled on a bunch of these.
Hand crafted backstage just prior to the show.. very cool tradition Ronnie started that make for great momento imo.

Other variations that some like to obtain or collect look like this for a refresher:





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-06-19 00:10 by MisterDDDD.

You know, there is a lot of "art" that kids could have created. "Could have" being the operative words. In fact, they didn't. Create them, that is. An artist created them. There is a large difference. I personally would love to have one, or better, one of the originals. Unfortunately I am a beer budget man with champagne tastes. And I don't even like beer all that much, would prefer mi sensi.

jb

Speech is silver, but silence is golden...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-06-19 01:37 by Stoneage.

Quote
Hairball
They remind me of children's doodle art or coloring books - way overpriced, and to be quite frank, they're gaudy and ugly.

Agreed

An an artist, Ronnie plays a very nice guitar

Rod

They are beautiful; I'd love one. I'm very fortunate as I work in the Chess Records building at 2120 South Michigan Avenue and they have four of Ronnie's paintings from the Voodoo Lounge Tour hanging in studio A upstairs. I love looking at them every time. One of the band on the tour; one of Bessie Smith, Ella Fitzgerald and Billie Holiday; a self portrait and one of Marvin Gaye. He's very good and deserves to be recognised as a great all rounder. I don't understand why anybody would critique this stuff negatively.

Nice, maybe I'll pick up a Havana one to go with the actual set list I got after the show.

Quote
bitusa2012

Quote
Hairball
They remind me of children's doodle art or coloring books - way overpriced, and to be quite frank, they're gaudy and ugly.

Agreed

An an artist, Ronnie plays a very nice guitar

And even that's debatable...

As for these prints - not signed, not numbered, not limited, and not fine art (just scribbled setlists), yet somehow Ronnie has priced them much higher than the actual concert lithos themselves.
Seems anyone with a set of colored markers could easily duplicate these and save themselves $100, whereas the actual concert lithos would be a bit more difficult to copy - especially the limited/numbered ones.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-06-20 07:15 by Hairball.

i went for the Mexico Litho, is a good painting of my country´s flag, great night in 2016 also!

i don´t want to suffer seeing how in some years will cost the double price as all this kind of lithos...

The setlists were all the same. He could have saved some ink by just adding the two interchangeable songs to the standard setlist...

So Hairball, lets see your set lists created with colored markers, you know, the ones your kid could do. Then put them on ebay and see what they sell for.

Get it now? Those who do not appreciate art should not lower themselves to critique it.


jb

Quote
jbwelda
So Hairball, lets see your set lists created with colored markers, you know, the ones your kid could do. Then put them on ebay and see what they sell for.

Get it now? Those who do not appreciate art should not lower themselves to critique it.


jb

I'm sorry jbwelda, but you don't seem to have a clue about what art is yourself. And you don't seem to understand the importance of a name.
Ingmar Bergman used to do grocery lists and then throw them in a garbage bin. Someone managed to get hold of some of them.
They are actually salable on the market. It's all in the name.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-06-20 21:09 by Stoneage.

Quote
jbwelda
So Hairball, lets see your set lists created with colored markers, you know, the ones your kid could do. Then put them on ebay and see what they sell for.

Get it now? Those who do not appreciate art should not lower themselves to critique it.


jb

As someone who has two Masters degrees in art (MFA and MA), I can tell you I have a great appreciation for the subject, and have the credentials to critique art wherever and whenever I want.
I also always appreciate everyone's input on the subject whatever their opinion may be, and I never attempt to shut them down as you seem to be doing.
If you can't handle reading someone else's opinion (whether educated or not), perhaps you should just ignore it and move on.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
BluesManc
They are beautiful; I'd love one. I don't understand why anybody would critique this stuff negatively.

Maybe, cause people have the right not to like something even if you do,and also have the right to say so,to me they look ugly and way overprice,but those that like them please spend your $100.00 and get them, different strokes for different folks....

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Quote
jbwelda
I kinda like the Cuba one.

jb

Too bad he got the colors of the flag backward....star is in red triangle on Cuba flag...star in blue triangle is Puerto Rico.

[en.wikipedia.org].

[en.wikipedia.org].

Quote
jbwelda
So Hairball, lets see your set lists created with colored markers, you know, the ones your kid could do. Then put them on ebay and see what they sell for.

Get it now? Those who do not appreciate art should not lower themselves to critique it.


jb

You do realize that if Hairball were in the Rolling Stones, his would sell for just as much?

Quote
stickyfingers101

Quote
jbwelda
So Hairball, lets see your set lists created with colored markers, you know, the ones your kid could do. Then put them on ebay and see what they sell for.

Get it now? Those who do not appreciate art should not lower themselves to critique it.


jb

You do realize that if Hairball were in the Rolling Stones, his would sell for just as much?

Discounts Ronnie's "brand" as an artist, but a fair point.
Ronnie's done a great job as an artist creating his own style over the decades and part of his creative personality comes through even in these setlists imo.
Lots of color, passion for the craft, fun, flair etc.

If Charlie were to just drop these out of the blue for example, I doubt they would be as marketable. Same with Keith,
which of course neither would do as they haven't spent decades establishing themselves as artists.

Give me a break. Oh, sanity. Those setlists are as much art as a child's doodle. I don't mind people buying i (to each his own)
but please don't come talking about art. You haven't a clue what you're talking about.

Sure, DDDD. Up to a point. Too much monkey business and the whistle blows...

Rolling Stones' Ronnie Wood: Painting is my 'God-given talent'

"I think it's born in me that I'm an artist of the visual kind first," said a reflective Ronnie Wood over the phone in his north London studio. "There's nothing I enjoy doing more today than painting in oils, and that's how I used to paint as a teenager."

Although recognized primarily for his status as a rock 'n' roll deity, the 71-year-old Rolling Stone has been turning heads with his visual art for even longer than he has with his music.

Wood's paintings have been exhibited around the world, and today grace the walls of London's Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, and have been collected by the likes of Bill and Hilary Clinton.
Though he's most known for paintings of his fellow Stones, as well as musicians like John Lee Hooker and Muddy Waters, Wood is also passionate about subjects like horses and landscapes, and works with a multitude of mediums. This past December, he released "The Rolling Stones' Set Lists," a limited-edition book of drawings on canvas.

"I sold my first two pieces to my music teacher at school for four pounds, and they were abstract pieces," he proudly recalled. This was no small feat for the fledgling Wood -- then still in elementary school -- whose older brothers, Art and Ted, both studied art.
It wouldn't be long before he would enjoy his first group exhibition: "There was a man on TV called Adrian Hill, and he had a program called 'Sketch Club.' I won the artist of the week kind of thing a few weeks in a row, and he said, would I come along and have an exhibition of my work and join some of the other children? I was about 12 or 13 when this was going on."

Later he would receive formal art training at the Ealing College of Art in London. On being both a musician and an artist, Wood explained that, "Being a Gemini, I've always flown the two flags. They've gone hand in hand, music and art."

That seemed to be the case for many of his contemporaries: Many of them, including Pete Townshend of The Who, Ray Davies of the Kinks and bandmate Keith Richards were art school students, too.
"There was a direct connection (between art school and rock 'n' roll) in that everyone seemed to be in a band or combo of some kind ... Pete was making statements by smashing his instrument; that was a bit expressionist in the art world, you know?"

"I sold my first two pieces to my music teacher at school for four pounds, and they were abstract pieces," he proudly recalled. This was no small feat for the fledgling Wood -- then still in elementary school -- whose older brothers, Art and Ted, both studied art.
It wouldn't be long before he would enjoy his first group exhibition: "There was a man on TV called Adrian Hill, and he had a program called 'Sketch Club.' I won the artist of the week kind of thing a few weeks in a row, and he said, would I come along and have an exhibition of my work and join some of the other children? I was about 12 or 13 when this was going on."
While Wood always earnestly pursued his art on the side after making it big in music, it wasn't until the early '80s that he began exhibiting and selling. "When I'd spent all my money on the good life," he recalled, "I realized that I had to exploit my other God-given talent, and I thought, 'Actually, I can paint! Why don't I earn my bread and butter by selling some of my prints and drawings?' So that's what I started to do when I lived in Los Angeles and I was in New York -- sort of having exhibitions there, as well."
Despite his lifelong artistic endeavors and pursuits, establishing himself as an artist in his own right wasn't easy.

"When I first made an entrance, as it were, into the proper art world ... I had to get my foot in the door by making a statement of drawing people and portraits," he said. And while Wood has been creating art all his life, some critics haven't been able to see past his rock reputation and take him seriously.
"Some sticklers in the art world have said, 'I don't know who Ronnie Wood thinks he is!' There's a big critic over here ... (who) said, 'Well, as much as I don't like to admit it, Ronnie Wood can actually paint.' You know, because he wanted to really put me down."

Wood isn't put off by such remarks, though: "That's what I do: I can paint, you know, I can draw. So, I don't care what they say."

"(Art) is a bit like the Stones: We keep making music and I keep painting. It's an ongoing thing and it's something you never get down. You never kind of say, 'OK, I've done that, I can retire now.' It's always an adventure, you know?"
[www.cnn.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-06-23 01:34 by MisterDDDD.

“Personally, I think Ronnie’s work is terrible. Rock stars like Ronnie should stick to music, not painting.
There are quite a few famous rock stars who do art, but I think Ronnie, Bob Dylan and all the rest - they are all useless.” - Bob Geldoff
_________________________________________________________________________

From the Independent, 2016 - Ronnie

The Rolling Stones' Ronnie Wood joins a long line of musicians turned artists

Should musicians stick to their music, or should we allow them to spread their wings to other mediums – even if they're not that good

Matilda Battersby
@matildbattersby
Thursday 19 May 2016 11:44

Musicians often refer to themselves as “artistes” but increasingly famous rockers want to be recognised for their aesthetic talents rather than just their recorded ones. You may or may not know that the Rolling Stones’ Ronnie Wood is a prolific painter. Having trained at Ealing College of Art he has combined art and music throughout his career and can regularly be found sharing photos of his work on social media, most recently tweeting a tender sketch of his wife and unborn twins. An exhibition of his work is about to open at Castle Fine Art, South Molton Street gallery with prices starting at £2,250.

Trouble is, the exhibition, called Private Collection, is being billed as a chance for fans to “get their hands on a piece of rock ‘n’ roll history”. Which is all very well, but compounds the fact that Ronnie’s paintings are attractive chunks of Rolling Stones memorabilia rather than a chance to invest in the brightest and most exciting contemporary artist on the block. They will sell for thousands regardless of whether they are any good: and therein lies the nub.

Can a famous musician ever be taken seriously as an artist? They might be a creative genius on guitar, their lyrical lustre celebrated the world over, but will they be feted as “true artists” by the notoriously excoriating art world? Even without the sniffy, Emperor’s New Clothes nature of sifting good art from bad, chances are the efforts of some of our best known musicians would be more likely to end up in Boston’s Museum Of Bad Art than in Tate Modern.

A couple of years ago one of Ronnie’s paintings was auctioned by Christie’s for £300,000 but his rocker colleague Bob Geldof had this to say about his talents at the time: “Personally, I think Ronnie’s work is terrible,” the Boomtown Rat told the Daily Mail. “Rock stars like Ronnie should stick to music, not painting. There are quite a few famous rock stars who do art, but I think Ronnie, Bob Dylan and all the rest - they are all useless.” Dylan, despite being among the 20th century’s most celebrated and successful musicians, whose lyrical prowess has earned him space in poetry books and academic studies, has had a hard time from the critics when it comes to his paintings. The late, and notoriously spiky, art critic Brian Sewell called Dylan’s Skip Sharpe portrait “Contemptible. Just rubbish” and lambasted the National Portrait Gallery for exhibiting it in its Dylan Face Value show in 2013.

Last year The Independent’s art critic Michael Glover wrote a barbed critique of Dylan’s Brazil Series: “The most important question is this, of course. Does Bob Dylan, have any real skills as a painter? Only intermittently. His art always possesses a verve and a kind of brash immediacy... It is also technically pretty crude, often suspended somewhere between cartoon and caricature.” Yet when Dylan’s artistic efforts were first unveiled to the world (reluctantly, as legend would have it) around the turn of the century he was compared to Matisse, Edward Hopper and the German Expressionists. However, the more he has exhibited his oeuvre the nastier the comments from critics have become.Deserved or not this is a predicament that has faced – and possibly put off – many famous or successful would-be “artists”. Never mind that the YBAs became pseudo rock stars in their own right, if actual rock stars want to take a bash at “proper art” they’d better be technically and undeniably brilliant or they’ll be fed to the lions.

The roll call of musicians who went to art school reads like the credits of Top Of The Pops in its heyday: Keith Richards, Eric Clapton, Ray Davies, Freddie Mercury, Jimmy Page, Brian Ferry, Pete Townshend, Jarvis Cocker…the list goes on. Roxy Music’s Brian Eno is one of the few to have clawed his way out of the “rock star” epithet to be known equally, if not more, for his pioneering visual artwork. But it might help that he uses new technologies, light display, digital media – often in sympathy with soundscapes he has created – rather than donning a painter’s smock and making like Picasso.

The artists who appear to be taken seriously are the ones who keep the boundaries between what they’re creating and how they want the public to perceive them. PJ Harvey has never come out and said “Hey, look at me I’m an artist too” but has constantly supported her musical endeavours with drawings, paintings and poetry. Patti Smith has only recently begun exhibiting her photography (a show of her work opened at the Robert Miller Gallery in New York last month) but she has been snapping away for more than 35 years and her drawings have previously graced album covers. There is, after all, no reason why polymaths shouldn’t be able to flit adeptly between the creative disciplines. Except, perhaps that it changes the public persona they have spent so long crafting. Sewell’s green ink decried Paul McCartney’s artistic efforts as “childish rubbish” and who knows what the critic would have made of fellow Beatle John Lennon’s spidery sketches, or his conceptual collaborations with wife Yoko Ono.

Sometimes these famous talents appear too caught up in their own ideas and this can lead to overt criticism. They exist within a bubble, people are paid to look after them and babysit them and so perspective can be difficult to hold onto. Some years ago Marilyn Manson (whose eerie watercolours have been largely well received by the art world and feature in collections around the globe) was criticised because a painting he’d based on the gruesome Black Dahlia murder of 1940s Hollywood actress Elizabeth Short was alleged to have provoked a copycat attack. Fame and exposure can sometimes be unexpectedly harmful. In 2012 I interviewed Libertines and Babyshambles frontman Pete Doherty about an exhibition of paintings made using a technique he called “arterial splatter” (extracting his own blood, or that of a friend’s, and squirting it a canvas to make a drawing). While Marc Quinn and others have been using bodily fluids in artwork and been celebrated for it, Doherty’s exhibition provoked a decidedly mixed reaction. But the very fact of putting himself, his own blood, into the work, regardless of whether the pictures were powerful or decorative or moving, meant they had a cache and a value that went far beyond the aesthetic.

Does the art industry worry that famous musicians-turned-artists invite such fierce criticism? Cassie Beadle, curator of Pete Doherty’s blood painting exhibition at the Cob Gallery in London, thinks it does. “When working with Doherty, we were aware of the kind of criticism we would face but we didn’t want to ignore the elephant in room…It’s certainly a concern that the fame of the artist can overshadow any discernible talent,” she says. But whatever those concerns are there’s no denying it makes commercial sense for galleries in the short term. “An artist’s fame and the popularity of their output, even if the artistic credibility is lacking, is certainly directly correlated,” Beadle says. And with the music industry struggling to stay commercially viable perhaps it’s no wonder musicians are flogging their artwork for tens of thousands. At least we won’t be expecting a retrospective of Geldof’s work any time soon. “I have tried painting and drawing myself, but I have no talent for it. I really don't know a rock musician who has,” he says.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-06-23 00:48 by Hairball.

“I have tried painting and drawing myself, but I have no talent for it" -Geldof

"Those who can, do. Those who can't, criticize.' -Anonymous

Good for Bob Geldof for being honest with his own lack of artistic skills, whereas Ronnie seems to be fooling himself and shows no signs of humility- "That's what I do: I can paint, you know, I can draw" .
Perhaps he can paint and draw, but the quality is lacking big time, and if he weren't a Rolling Stone, we wouldn't even be talking about him in an artistic context - at least not visually. As the Independent stated,
Ronnie's work "will sell for thousands regardless of whether they are any good" because people want to "get their hands on a piece of rock ‘n’ roll history". These setlists are a prime example of that.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-06-23 03:31 by Hairball.

Meh. Opinions are like.. everyone's got one.
Part of what is great about art.

The Geldof criticism and the like seem more rooted in jealousy seems to me.
Those that study and/or attempt art like Geldof, seem more easily hostile.

If simple setlists, not really intended to be anything other than that, can get critics so riled, I can certainly see why his other artwork does.

My favorite Ronnie piece, that was actually a gift, remains "Beggars Banquet".
Love it. One of his best imo. (not done in crayon as far as I know )



Also love this early Charlie piece.
Doesn't capture his subject every time, but sometimes he nails it.





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2020-06-23 04:56 by MisterDDDD.