The Errol Flynn Blog

This image or video has been moved or deleted, says my stupid computer…? I cannot even reply to your post directly…

I'll try again. The method for uploading photos is frustrating!

Decker made the shirt black which was easier to paint and would reduce the likelihood of anyone making the connection with the source photo.

That's why I couldn't imagine which one he took. Never would have guessed that it was this one. Thanks so much, Robert!

Painting from a photograph isn't in and of itself an issue, but this is something that would require me to go into much more detail than time and space would allow here. Suffice it to say, I myself have used the method often in my work especially when commissioned to paint celebrities. However, the difference is in the presentation–Decker fancied himself an “artiste” worthy of being taken seriously (which Flynn fans seem to have fallen for), something that would demand that his methods be of the highest level. They weren't. Had he simply produced the painting privately for Flynn without the accompanying fanfare, I would not be taking the position I do–that a sow's ear has been confused with a silk purse.
P.S. The photo IS now uploaded.

yes that is so cool.

I have to admit I'm more with you, also in your criticism below – the painting never seemed a masterpiece to me, but then all the fans said, yes, it is so gorgeous and I tried to find something about it which I liked… but never really succeeded. Peer pressure, you know.

It certainly does and more over have you read David's posting in “The Falling Rocket” post about this painting – being painted on CARDBOARD? I always thought it was an oil on canvas! I am stunt to say the least!

Tina, do you mean me? Yes, I had the picture, and some more from this series. They rank in my category “Strange Tie”. Here they are:

Maybe the first picture is not – maybe the tie is different – yeah —

As promised Inga here is my picture series. Needless to say I am differently organized with my pictures and had to find them the hard way and make a new sub-file for them, which I did.
After second thought I'll just post the ones you do not show. I have the four you show and three more.
Here they are:

I was wrong, your third is another one indeed – pipe is closer to the mouth. Sorry, it's early in the morning, eyes are a bit blurred still. I guess there are many more out there – just remember how many there exist of the Flower Series!

Yeah – I can't see straight either! I saw your post after I posted mine – yikes! I tried to do some postings last night but the blog was off line and this morning I could not remember what I wanted to post, but it will come back to my scrambled brain.
Flower series is right and then there are a lot of pictures with same tie I noticed when I was looking for the Decker-Tie picture. I have the picture Robert posted but never connected it with Decker's painting – God in heaven – who would think that he painted it from a picture and on CARDBOARD – did you read David's post. I would have thought it is oil on canvas! If this is so the painting has no value except a sentimental one. What do you think about all this starling news or anybody of our authors?

Cardboard can be stable as well, I think, it depends on its thickness… there are different types? I think the picture has a value for Flynn fans only – if it were on auction at ebay, I think it'd go for an enormous price.

Both were done in 1943, but research has not yet covered that year. The painting appears to have been presented to Flynn during the filming of “Uncertain Glory”, which took place in the latter part of '43. I have photos of Decker,Flynn, and Raoul Walsh standing next to the painting as it is presented, one with just Decker and Flynn, and one with Flynn alone. They will be included in the Chronology, of which I am just now completing 1938.

I agree Inga and it is what I said too – the painting has no value except a sentimental one, which means fans, family, friends, curio seekers, etc.etc.etc. Value like a painting of a renowned painter i.e. a museum piece it has none. If Decker would have painted the picture in oil on canvas and in a personal Decker style it would have the art value of Decker's paintings. I don't know what the value of an original Decker painting is today or even if there exist such thing.
Anyway, Robert will know the answer! How about it Robert?

And let's not forget how bad he smelled.

Thank you for the information!
Btw, you are saying you are in 1938 with the Chronicle? Seriously, I thought you are close to publishing? When do you think you will publish it? I still want to have and read it too … surely you know what I mean!

Your statement – (with vast amounts of info and visuals I hadn't realized were available),
Now you really surprise me, I always thought you had every information at your feet or on your fingertips! From where is all this new material – visual and info – coming or available from? On the Internet – I don't think so! You really have my curiosity going!

Your comment Robert has no reply button – just wanted to say “you lucky duck” and I wish you the best of luck!

thank u for answering my question, Robert. I was just so very curious as to when John Decker painted Errol's picture.

Tina, you were absent for too long, you missed a few things: www.theerrolflynnblog.com…

This is true Inga and I think I will be absent again – radiation is starting Sept. 6th! I did see this post at an earlier time, can't remember when, mine is different it shows his family history from Germany. He was a friend of Errol and I think we should engulf friends of Errol in a way like – if they were good enough for Errol, they should be good enough for us. We don't need to dwell on them but mention them if appropriate or in connection with a subject as the current one is – his painting of Errol! I am quite sure you agree with me?

Of course, Tina! Good luck for Sept. 6th! You are up late today, I'm at work already.

Robert you have all our assistance – you just say the word!

Heartily agree!

And that from a nicely mended heart!