oking, vibrant face looks back at the viewer from the canvas. Close is not actually painting the parts of a face, but simply small areas of colors on a vast surface. Standing inches away from the canvas, it is impossible to discern any of the details that seem so obvious from a few feet away.
             Despite its highly abstract style, the face portrayed in Robert is strikingly realistic, which can be attributed to the fact that Close copied the painting from a photograph he took. Robert Rauschenberg stares out from the portrait, an unusual, slightly bemused grin spread across his face. His expression is quite natural - his eyes seem somewhat unfocused as if he were looking farther back at something behind where the viewer might be. Rauschenberg is depicted in a very warm, genial, and unassuming manner, which is understandable considering the artist's relationship with him – they are not only fellow artists but friends, as well. However, the modest, unpretentious portrayal of Close's friend is contrasted heavily by the physical nature of the painting – at eight-and-a-half by seven feet in size, it easily dwarfs any viewer and could possibly instill a feeling of insignificance and even intimidation in them (at the museum it was the only piece of art occupying the entire wall). In a sense, Robert is a portrait that brings both a simple, almost humble quality to its subject while at the same time glorifying the individual depicted to mammoth proportions that demand immediate and undivided attention.
             The piece I am comparing Robert to is Georges Seurat's legendary painting A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte (1884-86). Upon first glance, the two paintings seem to have little in common (La Grande Jatte is not even a portrait), but in terms of both style and ideology, they have many intriguing similarities. As far as subject matter goes, Robert is of a single person; La Grande Jatte is of many people. However, the manner in w...