Another Fuss

Court Painter addresses his portrait of Jordan B. Peterson

‘I don’t think that painting a portrait of someone means you agree with everything they say.You only agree to Visa or American Express.’

 Court Painter in studio with  Dr, Peterson and a painting of his favourite pony which is rumoured he found on the street and pets excessively.

The day before yesterday preparing for the release of a new painting , a photo of Court Painter with Canadian psychology professor Jordan B. Peterson started making the rounds online. Peterson, a public speaker and bestselling author, has become a polarizing figure for his views on topics such as feminism, white privilege and non-binary pronouns. Press Attache A Hardon MacKay  posted a photo of Peterson with Court Painter and friends in his studio, which was then circulated on Twitter , causing a wave of mixed reactions.

Please note: This is not a painting…it’s a photograph!

A rather wordy interview was self conducted in the presence of citizen journalists in Court Painter’s tony studio in Inglewood, a hipster district of Calgary. The following expurgated version has been posted .

“I talked about it a lot , man, because, I mean, it’s sensitive isn’t it?” says Court Painter from his cramped studio in Inglewood. “Because I personally don’t agree with like all that Dr. Peterson has to say, and I had a lot of conversations and inner dialogue with myself about how and if I should like respond. What didn’t feel right was a tweet or an Instagram, because it felt more nuanced than that and it felt like I’d love to have, like, a conversation, man”

Like, one of the wonderful things about my stand up straight Press Attache A Hardon MacKay , like he’s had such an open door policy on portrait commissions and we’ve brought in so many people that I can paint and share the fumes. … I primarily was very interested in Dr. Peterson’s work on psychology, I knew he put words in  books  and I found them like very, very interesting and met him through Youtube videos and invited him down to the studio for a commissioned portrait , which was very interesting and one of many interesting sittings I’ve had in the studio.Did I mention like it was interesting?

I don’t think that painting a portrait of someone means you agree with like everything they say. We disagreed right off the bat on the froggy merits of Pepe and Kermit . Anyway as long as the credit card goes through I accept whatever the sitter stands for as long as like the bars stay open after midnight. Because  I am able to paint a portrait of anyone at risk of offending liberals I don’t see the harm in engaging in a bit of painterly pitter patter splatter. And as I said earlier, like primarily I’m interested in the good doctor’s psychological head stuff that is about girly power,desirability of white heterosexual male patriarchs skateboarding and calling a spade a spade instead of mixing up pronouns which I am dead against certainly among polite company  in the studio. Anyway I find it very interesting. Did I mention I find it like interesting?

You know I have become an artistic figurehead  especially in art celebrity culture. Its like, as a portraitist of  political and celebrity  personages, I didn’t sign up to paint because I wanted to try and be a role model to vulnerable males and be interviewed by CBC or to be a political thinker and be heard on my view of politics.

I just want the biggest slice of the celebrity fame and fortune pie that I so richly deserve.

Court Painter as seen at the farmers market every Saturday

I love the opportunity to  disagree and I think that’s something that’s at risk of being quashed to much of an extent among my caucasian buddies. I have made my fortune and celebrity art status by confining my product to mostly disagreeable white male power subjects because they are like so plentiful.They breed like rabbits. And really, I’m tired of listening — I think I sometimes listen like too much about what I should paint, I think we listen too much as a culture — But I think it’s precisely why Peterson and Sam Harris and all these other pale guys are having these two or three-hour-long conversations on podcasts, and that those things are like so popular, is because these are incredibly long and nuanced conversations to have. I mean, as fascinating as it is, I’m not sure I’m going to have the time to get in all my opinions on one of those in the time we’ve got now. But I think that myself as like Court Painter I am definitely not very interested in the public discourse generally and like all the things that are going on.I mean like if it isn’t one thing it’s another!

I want to be a force of artistic disgruntlement. I think the world needs that like right now. And I find the divisive side of things is something that I find inspiring and am grateful that it’s such a dominant part of the discourse right now,especially in my studio and local bar. And  if there is any opportunity to make me like richer and smell better through disgruntlement I think that’s what I am like excited about.Let me explain…..

At that point Press Attache A Hardon MacKay stepped in and demanded everyones recording device, sputtering that the Court Painter enterprise has an artistic mission that is agnostic to the political and ideological currents of modern times and Court Painter’s remarks should not be taken out of context because he was just feeling tired,  cranky and entitled.

Let’s Party!

Maxime Bernier in a stroke of marketing genius has named his new party the People’s Party of Canada.


“For too long Canadian politics has been hijacked by party poopers like interest groups, cartels, lobbies, international groups, corporate or union interests of politicians and bureaucrats in Ottawa who are disconnected from ordinary citizens who want to party…whoooo!,” he whooped.



The issue should have stayed in the political realm and out of the courts all along, University of Waterloo political science professor Emmett Macfarlane suggested.

“I think it’s bad decision after bad decision. I think it was manifestly unfair for the Ford government to drop this in the middle of a municipal election. I think the judge yesterday overreached in striking down the law,” he said. “And I think the use of the notwithstanding clause is an imprudent decision to defend an imprudent law.”