George W. Bush, in his portrait by Robert Anderson, sits before a flowering white lily, symbol of innocence in Christian iconography.

Legs splayed, arms on knees, a casual white shirt with pocket flaps instead of the traditional suit and tie: In his official portrait, unveiled at the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery last month, George W. Bush seems to be reinforcing a message that perhaps his presidency didn’t: He’s the guy you’d want to have a beer with, not necessarily the kind of diplomat you’d expect in the Oval Office.

While the portrait has generated criticism, little of it has been about the art itself. Last week, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., called on the museum to change the painting’s label, which referred to ”the attacks on September 11, 2001, that led to wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.” In a letter to the gallery’s director, Sanders wrote, “When President Bush and Vice President Cheney misled our country into the war in Iraq, they certainly cited the attacks on September 11, along with the equally specious claim that Iraq possessed vast arsenals of weapons of mass destruction. The notion, however, that 9/11 and Iraq were linked, or that one ‘led to’ the other, has been widely and authoritatively debunked.” The gallery has since changed the label (pdf).

To combat the apparent lack of critical discourse, especially locally, concerning the paintings of the first couple — Bush was painted by his Yale classmate Robert Anderson, while his wife’s portrait was done by Aleksander Titovets — I asked various artists, curators and critics with local connections to share their thoughts on the portraits. The responses ranged from the comical (Bush looks like he’s an adult-diapers ad) to the meta (in 2009, why is an oil painting still the standard for official portraiture?) to the art historical (Bush’s choice of a white shirt and white lilies, a Christian symbol of purity).

Here’s what those who responded had to say.

A placid Laura Bush, painted by Aleksander Titovets

Max Andrews, former visual arts curatorial fellow at the Walker Art Center; co-founder of the Barcelona-based curatorial office Latitudes:

“It would be better in seeds by Lillian Colton!”

(Andrews was featured in my 2006 piece, “Agit-crop,” which mentioned his contribution to the Minnesota State Fair crop art contest, a seedy depiction of Homeland Security’s terror threat-level indicator.)

Rich Barlow, Minneapolis-based painter and musician:

“All of the portraits strike me more as ‘illustrations’ than ‘paintings.’ The two presidents [Bush and Bill Clinton] both look like illustrations from those pictorial hardcover children’s books on historical figures. Hillary’s is interesting in its Renaissance portrait reference — but it looks like an illustrator’s idea of what that would look like and like it was too reliant on a photo, as they all do. The Laura Bush portrait seems to me like it will age the most poorly. It just feels corny, like an illustration from the cover of a ‘women’s fiction’ book, or again, like a children’s book illustration — less of a ‘great people of history’ book than the presidents, more of an image that is condescending to the children with its insistence on making her look more friendly and approachable.

“Further, a question: Why do official portraits all have to be paintings in this day and age? It’s weird that there is still this idea that a painting is more legitimate than a photograph, yet I feel that these paintings are less legitimate as art than many excellent photographic portraits are.”

Frank Gaard, Minneapolis painter:

“[Bush's portrait] looks like an ad for Viagra or adult diapers. Very bizarre portrait of president’s spouse looks like ad for women’s personal products. Then it’s the sheer narcissism, having herself painted as if she was 30 years old or younger. Sometimes she seems like the real idiot of the pair. You know, like George W. didn’t want a girl who was smarter than him!”

Dan Ibarra, graphic designer and co-founder of Aesthetic Apparatus:

“This newly revealed portrait of Bush reminds me of a moment from the NPR radio program Wait, Wait, Don’t Tell Me in which host Peter Sagal brought up an interview from 2006 in which the president was quoted as saying the best moment of his presidency was ‘catching a 7.5-pound perch on my lake.’ After the initial laughter died down, Roy Blount Jr., quickly replied, ‘In his defense, I think he’s right.’

“In that same sense, I think this portrait is actually a pretty perfect reflection of the presidency. Sitting in front of you in the portrait is not a man who reflects any respected decision-making power nor does his visage invoke respect or honor. He doesn’t even desire that impression.

“George W. Bush’s entire identity was based upon this personal profile that — with all his colloquialisms, accent and mispronunciations — he was an Everyman, an average American. And this portrait reflects this succinctly and effectively; no tie, sitting on a couch, not even really at any recognizable place of business. The foundational flaw with this portrait, and with the entire Bush presidency, is that this would be an interesting portrait for a Fortune 500 CEO or a city politician. But the last thing this world needs is an American president that was not at his utmost level of professionalism and intelligence. Yes, I relate to an Everyman, but I don’t want him for my president. George W. Bush is proof of what happens. And this portrait is proof that he makes no apologies for that.”

Todd Norsten, artist and 2006 Whitney Biennial participant:

“I hope that he can perform a miracle similar to the loaves and fishes with the vase behind his left shoulder, so that more Americans can have a pot to piss in.”

Mason Riddle, St. Paul-based critic and writer on visual arts, architecture and design; former director of Minnesota Percent for Art in Public Places program:

“In Christian iconography, the color white and the flowering lily usually signify innocence and purity; it is the flower of the Virgin Mary and is an attribute of Archangel Gabriel. In some instance it can symbolize chastity. A smiling President Bush dresses casually in a white shirt, backgrounded by a vase of blooming lilies. Given that today is President Bush’s last full day in power, we can only reflect on what poor or misrepresentative fashion color (Bush’s white shirt) and flora choices (vase of blooming white lilies) these are. Wars, ambitious deregulation leading to economic collapse, loss of world respect, torture and environmental degradation. The color white does not come to mind. (Although his AIDS effort is laudatory.) Given Bush’s evangelical enthusiasms, and his professed inside communiqués with God, one can only surmise that the President predetermined these choices. But sanctioned by God? With that said, the portrait likeness is good, a casual, smiling W — thank our lucky stars there is no audio. Go hither to Texas past-president; do good, and cross not our path again.

“Laura Bush’s rather impressionistic portrait is a fair likeness, when she was perhaps about 15 pounds lighter. Sitting in a flowery, decorative, Symbolist-like interior, Mrs. Bush is pleasant looking — and expressively opaque as always. But, Mrs. Bush has never really revealed her thoughts about the events of the last eight years, has she? Whatever her thoughts, someone must be President Bush’s wife — Laura wears the role well. Stand by your man.”

Cameron Wittig, Minneapolis-based photographer:

I think this portrait is a total success!

It’s no surprise that he’s sitting down. But not only that — he’s barely sitting. He’s failing at sitting down. There appears to be nothing supporting him, he is floating, in a crouched position, in space. Perfect!

His feet are cropped off. The means by which the man is physically connected to any earthly reality — gone. Not only gone, the artist signs his name through the ankle, as if performing surgery on an unnecessary limb.

A chest of drawers, containing who knows what kind of secrets, slightly masked by a bouquet of white lilies. Whoa, hey look! Lilies!

It’s apparent the painter wasn’t given an actual sitting with the President. Why bother? Laura or one of the twins probably peeled the image from a sticky-page family album that had been gathering dust on a shelf in the Crawford den for several years. A 4×6 glossy printed at Walmart. Presidential portrait — put it in the mail and strike it off the list!

Good art is always ruined by too much deliberation. Go with your gut, then go to bed. Hang it in the National Gallery; it’s done to perfection.

Making the cover of TIME wasn’t the peak of Shepard Fairey’s successes this election season: his iconic Obama poster was purchased by the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery for an undisclosed sum, and a reworking of the red, white and blue classic is being given away to donors to the historic inauguration. But for those of us who don’t have Fairey’s vision or twenty bucks to spare, there’s Obamiconme.com, a site by Paste magazine that lets users make their own Obamicized versions. We tried out Al Franken and Norm Coleman (swap headers depending on your political preference or predictions of the Senate race outcome) and, after the jump, a bit of advice for Rep. Michele Bachmann next time she’s on “Hardball” paired with her Sixth Congressional District challenger: THINK and TINK.

Want to submit your version for possible publication? Email me at pschmelzer [at] minnesotaindependent [dot] com.