Oh Lord won’t you buy me an Arthur Boyd?

Deutscher-Menzies have a great auction coming up. I love, totally love, this Arthur Boyd. But do not alas have a spare 200K. If you are a Troppodillian who does you should high-tail it down there.


While you’re there, I reckon you should buy this Charles Blackman – a steal at around 50K and . . .


Then there’s this painting by Emma Minnie Boyd.


On consulting The Art Encyclopedia I find that Emma Minnie Boyd was Arthur Merick Boyd’s wife and the grandmum of ArthurJr, the painter of the first painting.

Then there’s Arthur’s brother David (who’s not much chop) and Robyn the architect and Martin the novelist and Penleigh the painter in the early part of the twentieth century. Maybe Emma Minnie gave Penlieigh a few clues on painting trees because Penleigh Boyd could paint a mean tree. In any event they say that Emma Minnie’s picture will go for a paltry 2-3K (plus buyers margin of 20%).

This entry was posted in Art and Architecture. Bookmark the permalink.
Notify of

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
James Farrell
James Farrell
16 years ago

This deserves a comment before it slides off the edge.

I agree with you about the Boyd, but what about a bit of analysis? What makes it work? Emma Minnie’s, on the other hand, would not be out of place in a Fantastic Furniture warehouse. But what makes it so insipid?

James Farrell
James Farrell
16 years ago

Energy, yes, that’s good. The sky seems to be dancing, in some of rhythm with the work. It is like a Van Gogh, right down to the foreground colours, which are not particularly Australian — but which make an eerie contrast with the more distinctively Aussie scrub at the back.

I don’t really get the Blackman, but I’m working on it.