Okay, this kinda pissed me off.
Have to call utter bullshit on this one Robert, Leyndecker is hardly a lost thread in art history, he might not be as iconic as Rockwell, but he is credit as the father of the modern american illustration, so much that these days it ain't hard to find even new artist coping his brush strokes tech.
However, Leyendecker wasn't the first guy to come around using these hyper masculine figures for the male ideal, as lot of his contemporanies were doing the same thing, like Dean Cornwell (who wasn't gay BTW).
View attachment 2272988
And both artist draw inspiration from the same movement that was all the rage in europe in the early 20th century, the art nouveau, who drew inspiration from classical and romantism for their ideal figures:
View attachment 2273032
BTW Robert, Leyndecker studied under Alphonse Mucha, the most proeminent name from Art Nouveau, and Mucha wasn't gay either.
The point is that Leyndecker didn't invent the Hyper Idealized male look of the 20th century, neither he did it because he was "THE GAY", that is such a reductive and petty way to see this amazing artist, because in Robert's tiny brain, we have to conflate Leyendecker's aesthetics solely to his sexuality because that will serve the argument that "THE GAYS" were always at the spearhead of cultural movement, when in reality it only diminishes Leyndecker own identity, which goes far beyond his sexuality, influences and individual style, because "THE GAY" likes to paint handsome man.
Look, if people want to use Leyendecker as example for important contributions from homesexuals in our culture, fine, go for it, but don't reduce this amazing painter to this ridiculous notion "HE WAS THE GAY ARTIST FORGOTEN BY TIME", go fuck yourself Robert.
No, seriously, go fuck yourself Robert.