I saw this on the shelf in the library and immediately thought: Oh YES! THAT is someone I need to know more about.  Not so much the man (I Wiki’d his bio but didn’t really find anything interesting), but  I was determined to take a serious look at his artwork.

The book is Leroy Neiman: On Safari. First, I have to tell you that I can’t even characterize Neiman in words. Maybe I could stretch out my arms really wide and that would show you the size of his ego… there’s a photo of him in the book with a canvas about 6′ by 20′ wide, or even larger,  and he’s got his safari outfit on and a big cigar sticking out of his mouth.  He’s painting plen air, and there’s a rhino about 3′ away from him and his canvas.

On the facing page there’s a photo of Neiman standing in the savanah with some elephants close-by, but the most remarkable features of the photo are his slicked-back hair, gigantic mustache[mustache/beard, it's like a mustache morphing into beard area] and his shirt unbuttoned to his navel.

I bring up these features of the book first because it’s hard for me to separate the man from the art.  It’s clear to me that they go hand in hand and Neiman’s art is not a man to shirk from a photo op. I think that’s pretty much a foregone conclusion that Neiman likes attention, so the question at hand is this: is the artwork a vehicle for attention or does it merit attention on its own… as artwork, not just as big colorful wallhangings.

In the book there are a number of sketches and preliminary drawings along with Neiman’s commentary about how his larger safari paintings came to be.  He talks about the majesty of the lions, the graceful leopards… but what strikes me is that I don’t see a lot of emotion in his artwork.  Neiman is definately skilled as a draftsman and painter but his work seems to have a lack of energy.  The animals he paints are known for being strong and fast and Neiman does not seem to convay that in paintings.  I don’t feel a sense of tension or  suspense.  Nor do I see a focal point that draws my eye in.  I find that a little bizarre, considering the book jacket says “LeRoy Neiman is known widely as a sports artist…and as a painter of the subject of action”.  I don’t want to judge an artists’ work solely on my expectations or personal taste, but I feel like there’s something odd.  Neiman’s technique underplays action, yet that’s his forte?

My take is that Neiman probably realized at a young age that he was a talented artist. Then he figured out he could get fame and fortune using his talent.  I’m guessing somewhere around 17 he stopped challenging himself artistically and decided instead to just enjoy what he already knew how to do.  That’s fine with me, but I don’t think Neiman’s work is challenging to the viewer, and if that’s the intent of the artist, I think that I’m hard-pressed to call it art.  Wall decorations, yes, but not art.