The Magazine of the Manchester Aviation MAVAS Art Society Issue 109 – June 2021 “Into the Night” The original painting by Chris Stone Oils on 26” x 16” stretched linen canvas EDITORIAL The front cover image is a detail from an oil painting entitled “Into the Night" by member across the pond, Chris Stone. It is an excellent portrayal of a Lightning F.2A code “J” of 19 Sqn piloted by the owner of the picture - Air Chief Marshal (retired) Sir William Wratten – who served on that squadron as a young flight lieutenant at RAF Gutersloh in Germany during the latter half of the 1960s. In order to fit the format of the magazine cover, Chris kindly allowed me to crop the horizontal, and extend the vertical dimensions of his painting (full painting shown above). Of necessity this has an impact on the composition of the original picture, which has the aircraft entering the picture from ‘stage right’’ with a good part of the sky brightening in the sunset towards the west and an occasional star showing through. Nevertheless, the image still conveys pleasing reflections and shadows on the fuselage, and the phenomenal power of the twin Rolls Royce Avon engines as they propel the Lightning on its take-off run into the night. On a more general topic, your Editor thanks those members – and personal friends – who have provided material for the magazine bank. We simply could not continue without these regular inputs Keep up the good work Peter Published on the 1st Thursday in March, June, September and December P.2 CONTENTS Front Cover – Bae Lightning F.2A by C. Stone 1 Editorial 2 Contents 3 Old Master Revisited – by P. W. Grove 4 Guess What – by P. G. Nield 6 Journey`s End – by D. F. Steeden 7 Aviation Art – Putting Them in the Picture – by K. Woodcock 8 Scratch Built Models – by S. Markland 15 Dave Bates – by P. G. Nield 19 Jackaroo`s Homecoming – by R. J. Rumbold 20 In the Pink – by C. J. Thompson 23 Library Update 26 Diary Dates and Covid-19 Consequences 27 Rear Cover – Paintings by D. Bates 28 P.3 OLD MASTERS REVISITED When your magazine editor was gently browbeating me into producing a further article, we talked about writing another piece about one of my paintings, why I painted it, how it was put together and so on. Whilst I was quite happy to do this, I thought it might be quite interesting to pick a painting by a proper artist, given that they frequently pack more storytelling, subtlety, compositional tricks and intellectual contemplation into a painting than even my picture of a film star driving a Porsche. I’ve picked a painting by Gainsborough called “Mr. and Mrs. Andrews”. It is in the National Gallery and is looked upon as a beautiful depiction of England’s serene rural landscape. It was painted by Thomas Gainsborough around 1750 and shows a recently married couple, with a view of the countryside that their two families owned and which the wedding brought into their joint ownership. Both are young (she is only 18) but clearly well to do, and Robert Andrews may well have gone to school with Gainsborough. It was one of Gainsborough’s early portraits and was unusual in combining portraiture and landscape. However, there are a number of things that are a bit odd about it. Gainsborough was the greatest portraitist of his day but was frequently rude about his sitters (if not to their faces). In this case he seemed to let his feelings show in his painting of Mrs Andrews’ face. She has a rather shrewish look that doesn’t seem to bode well for her husband, an outcome which is also suggested by the gathering dark clouds in the background. He seems a pleasant but not particularly bright huntin’, shootin’ and fishin’ type who hasn’t realised what he’s in for. At least his dog seems to love him. P.4 Another odd feature is that he is dressed in scruffy, pheasant shooting gear whilst she is in her best silk frock. The oak tree in front of which they posed is still standing so it’s possible to locate exactly where on the estate they were painted. Their original house also still exists and was positioned facing the couple, directly behind where Gainsborough stood. So it looks as if she has emerged from the house to sit for the painting, whilst Robert has just returned from his hunting. This difference in appearance suggests a significant difference in personalities. Gainsborough had other reasons for his antipathy. He had a natural sympathy for the rural poor. The land in the painting, of which the Andrews were so proud, had only recently been removed from common use and transferred to powerful landowners by the Enclosures Act, impoverishing hundreds of local peasants and farm workers. Mr. Andrews was a modern farmer, as the painting shows a series of furrows in the foreground that were apparently produced by the revolutionary new seed drill (see left). This introduced a level of mechanisation in farming that would serve to further demonstrate his wealth but would also lead to the loss of many farming jobs. It seems clear that Gainsborough accepted the commission for the painting whilst sneaking into the picture elements that suggested his disapproval of the couple. P.5 The last curiosity of the painting is that isn’t actually finished. In Mrs. Andrews’ lap is a blank space where something seems to have been omitted and the canvas is showing through. One convincing argument, by the critic Waldemar Januszczak, is that Gainsborough planned to paint a cock pheasant (there seems to be a feather already painted in her hand). It seems logical, as Mr. Andrews has obviously been hunting and way well have handed a trophy to his wife. However, Gainsborough possibly had an additional motive. In Dutch painting (very popular in England) a dead cock bird in the grip of a woman symbolised that woman’s dominance over her (hen-pecked) husband. There’s a certain amount of double-entendre here that works equally well in Dutch. For whatever reason, the painting was never finished and remained out of sight for many years. It only entered public view following a local auction of assorted house contents in 1927. It was spotted and bought by the National Gallery and has been on display ever since. Whether Gainsborough ever received payment for the work is unknown. Peter W. Grove GUESS WHAT Well, here we go again but first congratulations to the winners of the last “Guess What” who identified the Gloster E1/44, affectionately named “Gormless” by test pilot Bill Waterton. They were, respectively, Len Sakowicz, then Ged Terry from Bae Systems and finally our very own Roger Rumbold. The latest challenge is this very elegant flying boat from the mid Testing, testing, one, two, three 1920s and can be summed up in So many built - just one of me the words of a little poem, left. Open the valve to start the show There is only one answer chaps, so And off in a puff of steam I go be very specific ………. P.6 JOURNEY`S END Born in Bundaberg in 1892, Bert Hinkler was an Australian pioneering aviator and inventor. He served as a gunner in the R.N.A.S. and, after WW1, he worked for a time at A. V. Roe in Southampton. In 1931, having already made several record breaking flights, Hinkler set off from Canada in his recently locally acquired Puss Moth CF-APK on yet another epic flight. He flew firstly from Canada to New York and then on to the West Indies, Venezuela, Guyana and Brazil before crossing the South Atlantic, landing at London Air Park on 8th December, 1931. He became the first person to fly solo across the South Atlantic and for this he was awarded the Royal Aero Club Gold Medal, the Seagrave Trophy, the Johnson Bert Hinkler`s DH.80A Puss Moth at Memorial Prize and London Air Park, December, 1931 the Britannia Trophy for the most commendable flying performance of the year. Unfortunately, Hinkler lost his life in CF-APK in January 1933 when, after leaving London Air Park, he was crossing the Alps in an attempt to break C. W. A. Scott`s record to Australia of 8 days 20 hours. He came down in Tuscany and the cause was attributed to turbulence leading to flutter and subsequent wing failure. The painting was done to commemorate Hinkler`s remarkable achievement. I chose a monochrome palette for this pen and watercolour painting as I thought it the most appropriate to depict this historical event. To the initial pen and ink sketch I applied a very loose overall background wash. This was left to totally dry before a second was applied which gave additional form. The painting was finished off with the addition of strong tonal contrast including a deep shadow under the wing. Splatter was applied to create additional texture to the foreground. I feel I have achieved my aims with the finished piece. D. F. Steeden P.7 PUTTING THEM IN THE PICTURE “Them”, of course, refers to either male or female figures which can be introduced into an aviation scene. They can bring that extra dimension to any painting and allows us, as artists, to convey some emotion, which is often lacking in aircraft paintings. Just to be clear, we are not talking about the pilots nestling behind their cockpit windscreens but full length figures.