Exhibition review. Christopher Le Brun at Nigel Greenwood Gallery, London. Flash Art no.124 October/November 1985:
Christopher Le Brun has succeeded in making for fragments a fresh context: his works are full of echoes, but they hold the attention and, themselves echo in the memory as images, not just as tokens. This is a rare achievement in art, which tends to be weighed down frequently by symbol, by what is alluded to rather than what is. Although he has used myth and quotation from art, unlike other "cultured" painters he does not absent himself from his paintings, leaving an emotional vacuum that is hardly filled by irony...
Christopher Le Brun. "Representation."
Paper delivered to the Royal Academy Forum. Published by Architectural Review November 2004
When Caspar David Friedrich claimed, “The artist should paint not only what he sees before him, but also what he sees within himself. If he sees nothing within himself he should also forego painting what he sees before him…”, he not only captured the essence of Romanticism; he also posed a fundamental question with which art has been concerned ever since. If, as Friedrich states, perception and imagination throw up truths at least as important as objective “reality”, the issue is how to find ideas and techniques for representation which avoid contingency and randomness, and allow the work of art to establish significance and meaning.
Exhibition review. Christopher Le Brun at Sperone Westwater, New York. " ..the Watteau of the new expressionism..." Art Forum vol.XXVII, no.1, September 1988, p.136:
Christopher Le Brun continues his pursuit of the elusive, almost as an end in itself. The sense of mystery that pervades his work is the residue of - and perhaps an attempt to revive - that sense of "tragic insight" which Friedrich Nietzsche regarded as "the most beautiful luxury of culture." In his paintings, Le Brun combines an iconography of isolation with a muted sensual surface, less important for its assertive painterly quality than for its seductive atmospheric one; it bears some resemblance to Monet's elusive continuum of surface. There is a sense of restrained fullness in this surface, which makes the object embedded in it - yet also thrust onto it, as if the crust of some barely contained passion - seem all the more haunting. I used to think that the specificity of the object was important for Le Brun - that it mattered whether it was a horse or wreath, each imbued with its particular mythopoetic associations - but now I think it is an excuse for isolation....
An interview with Christopher Le Brun. Read the transcript of an interview from 2008:
"Le Brun’s painting implies a wide cultural literacy, encompassing mythology, philosophy, and music; historical anecdote is often translated into emotive abstraction when in his hands." --Wall Street Journal International