Halfway through the docu-mentary My Kid Could Paint That, we see proud parents Mark and Laura Olmstead curled up on their couch to watch 60 Minutes. It’s the night that a segment is airing about their daughter Marla, who, despite being only four years old, is one of the art world’s great rising stars, with collectors paying four- and five-figure sums for her cheerful, colourful abstract canvases. She’s a pee-wee Pollock, a pre-kindergarten Kandinsky, a De Kooning in diapers, a rugrat Rauschenberg, a toddler Twombly—okay, okay, I’ll stop—and even TV shows with zero interest in modern art have been eating her story up.
At first, the 60 Minutes piece follows the Marla Olmstead boilerplate, with Mark, an amateur painter himself, describing how he first put a paintbrush in Marla’s hand, and Anthony Brunelli, the local gallery owner who “discovered” Marla and her eagerest promoter, describing her as a prodigy on par with Mozart.
But then the report takes an unexpected turn, as a child psychologist examines the footage the 60 Minutes crew has shot of Marla painting. Her mood darkens. Marla isn’t behaving the way a true child prodigy would, she says, and her painting technique seems markedly different from that of the paintings being exhibited under her name. Hidden-camera footage of Marla at work seems to suggest that her father Mark is coaching her from the sidelines. The psychologist doesn’t come right out and say it, but the segment basically implies that Mark is either embellishing Marla’s paintings after the fact or is creating them himself. Either way, the Olmsteads appear to be perpetrating a massive fraud.
In some ways, My Kid Could Paint That is more interesting before the question of the authorship of Marla’s paintings arises. I love stories about the nature of art, and the Marla Olmstead case raises exactly the kinds of questions that, as someone who evaluates art for a living, I find most provocative. Is it possible for a four-year-old with no aesthetic consciousness to make art? What’s the difference between Marla and one of those elephants at the zoo that “paints” canvases when you stick a brush in its trunk? Should the story behind the creation of a work of art, or the artist’s biography, have any bearing on art’s artistic merit? How much influence can her father have over the painting before it becomes too “tainted” to be worth anything? I’m reminded of that great moment from John Guare’s play Six Degrees of Separation where an art collector walks into a kindergarten classroom and marvels at the drawings thumbtacked to the walls. “Your students are all Chagalls and Cézannes!” he tells the teacher. “How do you do it?” To which she replies, “I know when to take the painting away from them.”
But these themes pretty much fall by the wayside as the film becomes more about director Amir Bar-Lev’s quest to get Marla to paint a canvas on camera. The 60 Minutes crew couldn’t do it, and he can’t either—and as all the uneventful footage of Marla in her workroom piles up, Mark’s insistence that cameras make Marla too self-conscious to paint the way she does in private start to ring increasingly false. Bar-Lev becomes more and more of a presence in his own film as he wrestles with his doubts about the true extent of Marla’s talents and his guilt over potentially betraying the trust that the Olmsteads placed in him by allowing his crew into their home.
These issues are probably of more interest to other documentary filmmakers than documentary audiences—I personally was much more fascinated by Brunelli, the gallery owner, who embraces Marla as a genius or rejects her as his little prank on the blockheaded New York art scene, whichever is most convenient at the time.
But My Kid Could Paint That is one of those stories that contains so many issues, everyone will find something different in it to be fascinated by. Near the end of the film, Laura Olmstead begins crying in the middle of an interview, much to her own embarrassment. “Documentary gold,” she mutters sarcastically as she walks away from the camera.
Indeed.
Monday, February 11, 2008
My Art Belongs To Daddy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

3 comments:
Wonderful blog! I watched that documentary last night and really enjoyed it on so many levels. You hit the nail right on the head when you wrote that different people would find different aspects of the film noteworthy. As a non-Art-person, I found myself remembering all the times I'd gone to Art shows and such with my girlfriend (who is a True Art-Person) and I'd mentioned "any 5-year-old could paint that!" and I realized that I'd been wrong. It takes a sense of balance and purpose to create abstract art, and at least I learned THAT much watching the film. Thanks for blogging; you did a great job on it.
I actually watched parts of this documentary in my AP English class. I was extremely fascinated by this and the question remaining within my mind is whether or not these paintings are being bought for the quality of the artwork, or if the intrigue of the artwork is actually the fact that a five-year-old girl could be capable of doing such "elaborate" masterpieces. We discussed in class that it may be an elitist aspect to want to own a piece done by a child prodigy, but I, not being an art person, don't see the amazing factor with any of her art besides that it is pretty to look at. I have been to the Lourve in Paris, and I have been feet away from the Mona Lisa and I wasn't even nearly as impressed as I hoped to be; so my opinion probably isn't that valid. But I just wanted to give you "props" / "kudos" for this entry. It really sparked my interest and gave me some insight into someone else's point of view.
I am not an artist. I am not an art collector or expert of any sort, I have only learned enough about art from an Art 100 class to know that art is "the visual expression of an idea or experience through a medium". If a piece of artwork catches your eye, grabs your attention in any way, causes you to stop and take a second look (even if it is to say that you don't like the artwork), than that is indeed art.
Why is everyone so eager to dismiss the ideas and experiences of a child? Anyone who has a child of their own knows that we re-learn so much about life from our children, the beauty and innocence of life that we forget and ignore once we grow older and become hardened and opinionated about the world around us.
Imagine you are a child, squishing paint around on a canvas, loving the texture of it, loving the colors of it. Re-creating things you've seen or creating things you've imagined, letting your imagination run wild and watching it unfold, watching it come to life right in front of you. That's Marla.
My mother is an artist for herself, meaning she learned to paint merely for her own enjoyment and relaxation, to feel a sense of freedom. Marla's art grabs me because it reminds me of that freedom, that happiness of painting, like my mother's art. Like my mother, Marla paints for the simple and pure happiness of just painting. Painting for no other reason than to just make pretty colors come to life.
Shame on anyone for ridiculing a 4-YEAR-OLD and her family. Marla's parents were simply proud of their child's beautiful artwork and only wanted to show it off. They put it in a gallery show only after many people insisted that Marla's work was genius and needed to be displayed publically. The media insisted that Marla was a prodigy worthy of attention, not her parents (Marla's own mother hates the word prodigy). If you don't agree with her parents selling the paintings for Marla's college fund, then don't buy them, simple as that.
Shame on anyone for questioning her parents for not letting anymore media in their home to film Marla painting after what 60 Minutes did to them. It's better for the child to not have any more media in the home. And anyone who has children, like myself, knows that they NEVER act like themselves in front of a camera. I have a 4 year old son and a 6 year old son and whenever the camera comes out my 6 year old shows off, my 4 year old gets shy and won't do the cute things anymore that I turned the camera on to capture in the first place. So what makes anyone think that Marla would be her usual self and feel relaxed and free enough to paint in front of media cameras and strangers? I know my 4 year old is extremely shy in front of strangers.
Marla paints for fun, for enjoyment, relaxation and even her mother said that she's really worried all of this attention will take the enjoyment out of painting for her daughter. Her mother is a good mother, I know this because of the way she said that the lack of attention and lack of sales that happened as a result of the 60 Minutes report gave her relief to think that her daughter might be able to finally go back to just being a normal little girl who loves to paint in the privacy of her own home. If it was my child, I would have all the same worries that Marla's mother has expressed about the attention surrounding her child. Her mother even offered to take a lie-detector test just to put all of this ridicule and stress on her family to rest.
People criticize that Marla's artwork is inconsistent now that she's had all of this attention, well of course it is. It is common sense that artists go through stages and phases, and their artwork changes depending on what they're feeling and what is going on in their lives at the time when they did the artwork. What makes anyone think that a child's artwork would be any different? Of course her artwork is going to change, she can feel the tension in her home now from all of the ridicule her family receives. She can feel the stress and worry of her parents. She can feel and hear her little brother acting out because Marla gets all the attention, so why wouldn't she start saying that her brother did a painting too? It takes the very hot spotlight off of her, and she probably wants people to be just as proud of her little brother and give him attention too. It's simple child psychology, anyone who pays attention to their own child's emotions and reactions would be able to see how all of this affects her artwork.
Marla paints purely for the joy of painting, it just makes her happy. That's why I love Marla's work, for the simple happiness and freedom of a child painting for no other reason than to make pretty colors come to life, letting her imagination run wild. Why can't everyone stop over-analyzing her and just leave it at that?
Post a Comment