Wet on Wet oil painters
CBan...@webtv.net
Kay Kane
--
To reach me remove 'rcd' from my e-mail address
Dik F Liu wrote in message <19990410234642...@ngol04.aol.com>...
>In article <29953-37...@newsd-292.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
>CBan...@webtv.net writes:
>
>>Are there any wet on wet oil painters out there?<
>
>No
Yes!
The Ghost of Bob Ross
Dik F Liu
Kay Kane
emat...@tomatoweb.com wrote in message <7erfi2$g77$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <R9XP2.3454$Jc7.2...@news2.giganews.com>,
> "Kay Kane" <rcdsca...@theriver.com> wrote:
>> Dik F Liu wrote in message
<19990410234642...@ngol04.aol.com>...
>> Yes!
>> The Ghost of Bob Ross
>>
>>
>
>I may be sticking my neck out on this, Kay, but I believe Thiebaud uses a
wet
>on wet technique. I'm not 100% sure because I never took a painting class
>from him, but plenty of my friends did, and I've eavedropped in on
>discussions about his painting classes. He starts out with a turp wash,
and
>slowly builds up the color, and as the painting develops he's pushing
around
>a lot of paint. If you examine his paintings closely you can see it - I
mean
>brushstrokes that are two feet long haloing an icecream cone. Jeez, I
think
>it would take a lot of practice to do that -- I mean it gets like
watercolor,
>almost, in that you can't mess-up without paying a heavy price. It's very
>exacting. Unlike Bob Ross, Wayne would'nt say 'Who cares?"
>
>On the other hand, he once uttered a really disparaging remark about
'artist
>who glop on layers transparent goo" being somewhat amaturish.' This was
>strange, for he seldom was so negative (he may have been having a 'bad
paint
>day').
>
>Erik
All artists are moody as well as crazy aren't they? O.K. I'll buy that he
used wet-on-wet technique (why not?) but did he complete a painting in 1/2
hour? You didn't mention "happy little clouds"... No offense to Thiebaud,
but I bet he'll never get his own syndicated TV painting show...
Kay
P.S. Why didn't you just answer Dik's question first?
__
To reach me, remove "rcd" from my e-mail address
emat...@tomatoweb.com
> To reach me remove 'rcd' from my e-mail address
> Dik F Liu wrote in message <19990410234642...@ngol04.aol.com>...
> >In article <29953-37...@newsd-292.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
> >CBan...@webtv.net writes:
> >
> >>Are there any wet on wet oil painters out there?<
> >
> >No
>
> Yes!
> The Ghost of Bob Ross
>
>
I may be sticking my neck out on this, Kay, but I believe Thiebaud uses a wet
on wet technique. I'm not 100% sure because I never took a painting class
from him, but plenty of my friends did, and I've eavedropped in on
discussions about his painting classes. He starts out with a turp wash, and
slowly builds up the color, and as the painting develops he's pushing around
a lot of paint. If you examine his paintings closely you can see it - I mean
brushstrokes that are two feet long haloing an icecream cone. Jeez, I think
it would take a lot of practice to do that -- I mean it gets like watercolor,
almost, in that you can't mess-up without paying a heavy price. It's very
exacting. Unlike Bob Ross, Wayne would'nt say 'Who cares?"
On the other hand, he once uttered a really disparaging remark about 'artist
who glop on layers transparent goo" being somewhat amaturish.' This was
strange, for he seldom was so negative (he may have been having a 'bad paint
day').
Erik
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Larry Seiler
<snip>
Basically....I would just call this alla prima painting, or finishing an
oil painting from start to finish in one session. A basic thing done for
plein air or on location painting. I guess that would make me one.
...that there is a discussion group for this one aspect of painting in oils
alone surprises me... Guess if it serves a purpose.......(things that
make you go, "Hhhmmmmmm").
Larry Seiler
artist's web site at- http://cwinc.net/larryseiler
WetCanvas Artists page-
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Gallery/S/Larry_Seiler/index.html
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress
depends on the unreasonable man."
George Bernard Shaw
emat...@tomatoweb.com
"Kay Kane" <rcdsca...@theriver.com> wrote:
> All artists are moody as well as crazy aren't they? O.K. I'll buy that he
> used wet-on-wet technique (why not?) but did he complete a painting in 1/2
> hour? You didn't mention "happy little clouds"... No offense to Thiebaud,
> but I bet he'll never get his own syndicated TV painting show...
> Kay
> P.S. Why didn't you just answer Dik's question first?
> __
> To reach me, remove "rcd" from my e-mail address
>
Dik's question? He said 'no.' But as a matter of fact I did see a W.T. TV
show, aired on KQED San Francisco. It showed him painting an ice cream cone.
And your right, it looked like about a 4 or 5 hour project, very involved.
But gosh, you always dump on my heros like Bob Ross. I guess you didn't like
the German fellow before him either.
But I'll give you a confession. In 1961 I got a job at a company called "Art
Fair,' located in Compton, California. It was a mass-produced art
manufacturing company. While I normally worked in the frame department,
occassionally I would join the 'artists' when the orders were pouring in and
we got backlogged. The 'artists' were all ex-cons, guys who had taken up
painting at San Quintin or Folsom Prison. There were four or five regulars,
most of who were playing up the 'artiste' image to the hilt, with berets and
goatees (keep in mind that this was still the Beatnik era).
So here's how it worked. We would saw up several pieces of masonite into a
stack of fifty or a hundred same sized panels. Then we would do the
backgrounds, which were typically Ives Tanguey style blends done with a 4"
brush using that water based house paint (I can't even remember what it's
called, but you can still buy it to paint your walls--oh yes, latex). Then
the panels would go over to the screen printing area, where a key line in
light grey was imprinted on the panel. Then they went to a series of long
tables, face up, and we would assign ourselves colors, which were really
gloppy latex stored in vats which we would plop onto a piece of masonite,
then go to each painting and apply certain areas with a pallette knife.
"Paris Street Scene in the Rain" was my favorite. When all the color was
applied we would take them over to the spay booth and apply a coate of clear
lacquer.
The framming department was something else. We used the absolute cheapest
pine moulding imaginable. Since I was itenerant (that's why I liked the job,
because I could 'not go to work' whenever I wanted and still have it) my
Maestros in the Framing Department were all Mexicanos. These guys were
incredible. They could take a piece of wood that was apple crate quality and
make it look like a piece of Honduras Mahogany. They learned this in the
Mexican picture framing industry (LaLa land is just the northern reach of
this). I don't know if anybody out there has ever tried gold-leafing with
the imitation leaf that's available in hobby shops (brass) -- it's really
impossible. But the Mexicanos could make it look like the real stuff.
So the paintings were marketed as 'Hand Painted Original Oils." They
wholesaled for about 12 bucks to Motel chains and cheap restaurant chains
etc. (I earned 1.49 per hours, which was minimum wage in 1961 -- but you
could buy a snickers for then for a dime).
One day I was bad-mouthing our products, and one of the owners overheard me.
I was working on my least favorite item - an absolutely hideous "Spanish
Galleon" which was simply an obnoxious bright orange/yellow Tanguey
background, with a ship screen printed in black. But the rigging was done
this way: We had an appuratus that applied thick glue for the rope work,
which made it 3D! When it dried, we would dry-brush on gold paint on the
raised glue drippings. So I said to one of the ex-cons, "this is really a
piece of shit, ins't it?" He didn't say anything, because one of the owners
was standing behind me. (The owners of the company were two Armenian
supersalesmen and a graduate of a New York art school). So Bob (the owner)
tells me "That sort of offends me, Erik. I've really put a lot of work into
this company. Did you ever think about how difficult it is to produce art on
the scale that we do here, and stay in business? I'm pretty proud of myself
for designing this whole procedure, and making it successful in a business
environment. Just think about these things before you mouth off, will you!
My hard work also gives you a job." I felt pretty small -- but I still think
that painting was ugly to the max.
Every once in a while I check into a Motel and find these paintings on the
wall. So for those who argue that the sign of great art is its lasting
ability, think of this.
Anyway, Bob Ross and the German fellow are a notch above this, I think. But
I forget the mention the funnest part of making these paintings. The
signature. We used a script liner, and signed each painting (with illegible
squiggles) "Picasso", "Rembrant" etc etc (even insulting remarks sometime -
and laughed like hell at lunch break).
So how's that for 'art hell,' Kay?
April Showers
>But I'll give you a confession. In 1961 I got a job at a company called "Art
>Fair,' located in Compton, California. It was a mass-produced art
>manufacturing company.
(snipped)
>So the paintings were marketed as 'Hand Painted Original Oils." They
>wholesaled for about 12 bucks to Motel chains and cheap restaurant chains
>etc.
The last time I lived in a 'big city' there were frequent ads
on TV for those 'Sales' at local motels of "ORIGINAL ART" work
with "NOTHING OVER $39.00" -- of course when you went there
there were plenty 'over $39.00.' Malls were also a favorite
selling site. I was always under the impression that some
outfit in Florida mass-produced these cheap 'originals' with the
help of all the 'Sunday painters' who lived in retirement in
Florida, using much the same methods you describe.
April Showers
>But gosh, you always dump on my heros like Bob Ross. I guess you didn't like
>the German fellow before him either.
Bill Alexander preceded Bob Ross. You have to admit that they had
the "Half-hour painting" technique down to a science. But then
you never saw them paint subject matter of a portraiture nature.
Then there is Helen Van Wyck who I don't think I've ever seen
finish anything in her half-hour spot. Come to think of it I don't
remember being able to watch her for the entire half hour.
(don't be krewl -- Elvis)
Over...@orion.com
I've seen mall art
made in New York (it has also been made in Taiwan and Germany, I believe).
This is the *genuine oil painting for $49.95, framed* stuff you see. Here's
how it's done: a roll of canvas is rolled out and tacked up. Subject matter
experts (!) move along in front of it, sometimes sitting on stools,
sometimes standing. Someone paints all the skies. Next person paints the
flowers, or little kids, or Paris Street scene, ocean, etc. Someone signs
them with a fake name. When the paint dries, they roll up the canvas and
ship it to a distribution point. Then it is cut up into individual
paintings and framed with cheap stapled frames - and sold at art galleries
in the malls! They work incredibly quickly - art students, starving
artists, people with a knack for it, etc.
Here' a somewhat related story. An acquaintence of mine who lived in New
York is a good modern painter. Of course, he's usually hard up - and he
found a dodge. He painted a bunch of decorative seascapes, flowers, etc. -
better than the mall art but not much. He rented three booths at the
infamous Washingon Square Art Show (an outdoor show of Sunday and genre
painters that has to be seen to be believed). Then he hired three
out-of-work actors to *be the artist* at each of the booths. He nearly sold
out the work and made a bundle. I don't know if he did it in subsequent
years or not.
The thing I objected to about Bob Ross (and that other guy) is that they
had basically a commercial program on public television - you had to have
their particular brand of oil paint in order to paint in the *wet on wet*
style (not *wet in *wet, which is a legit painting style). Regular oil
paint won't work. Also, I think public television has an obligation to
present real art, not fake art passed off as real (just my opinion).
Overlord
-N.
Showers) wrote:
> In article <7esg7b$b02$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, emat...@tomatoweb.com says...
>
> >But gosh, you always dump on my heros like Bob Ross. I guess you didn't like
> >the German fellow before him either.
>
> Bill Alexander preceded Bob Ross. You have to admit that they had
> the "Half-hour painting" technique down to a science. But then
> you never saw them paint subject matter of a portraiture nature.
> Then there is Helen Van Wyck who I don't think I've ever seen
> finish anything in her half-hour spot. Come to think of it I don't
> remember being able to watch her for the entire half hour.
There is also a guy that literally paints with bunched up toilet paper..I
think he may hold the Guinness world speed record...and it's wet into wet.
-N.
--
N
To reach me, remove _xxx from my address.
Kay Kane
This is the funniest and most bizarre story I've heard in ages (and most of
the bizarre experiences I read about in this n.g. usually come from you!) I
am printing this out, copying it, and handing them out to my students
tonight. I always thought little elves did the paintings, like they did
shoes. Now, tell me who does (and how they do it) the paintings of dogs(?)
playing pool, drinking beer and smoking cigars and I'll consider myself very
knowledgeable about art.
And let's not fail to acknowledge that 1/2 hour superstar of acrylics -
Brenda Harris! These people all have their own product line of paints,
instruction books, videos, brushes, etc.. I am just amazed by the speed
because I am a plodding person even at top speed (sometimes taking a year to
complete a work).
--
Kay
To reach me remove 'rcd' from my e-mail address
emat...@tomatoweb.com wrote in message <7esg7b$b02$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
Kay Kane
--
Kay
emat...@tomatoweb.com wrote in message <7esg7b$b02$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <kofQ2.6190$Jc7.3...@news2.giganews.com>,
> "Kay Kane" <rcdsca...@theriver.com> wrote:
(snipped)
Erik wrote:
>In 1961 I got a job at a company called "Art
>Fair,' located in Compton, California. It was a mass-produced art
>manufacturing company. While I normally worked in the frame department,
>occassionally I would join the 'artists' when the orders were pouring in
and
>we got backlogged. The 'artists' were all ex-cons, guys who had taken up
>painting at San Quintin or Folsom Prison. There were four or five
regulars,
>most of who were playing up the 'artiste' image to the hilt, with berets
and
>goatees (keep in mind that this was still the Beatnik era).
***I guess my liberalism will show up here, but, it would be nice if these
ex-cons were given an arts education because it sounds like they were
grabbing an identity, but no one would take them seriously (especially with
the wages you mentioned). Isn't there a book out now in the top 10 written
by a (former, I guess) homeless man?
>So here's how it worked. We would saw up several pieces of masonite into a
>stack of fifty or a hundred same sized panels. Then we would do the
>backgrounds, which were typically Ives Tanguey style blends done with a 4"
>brush using that water based house paint (I can't even remember what it's
>called, but you can still buy it to paint your walls--oh yes, latex).
***I just found out that a friend of mind who shows nationally and
internationally uses latex house paint to prime canvas and then covers it
with watered down Elmer's glue! I'm thinking about trying it (feel guilty
about rabbit skin glue + it sounds so much cheaper).
Then
>the panels would go over to the screen printing area, where a key line in
>light grey was imprinted on the panel. Then they went to a series of long
>tables, face up, and we would assign ourselves colors, which were really
>gloppy latex stored in vats which we would plop onto a piece of masonite,
>then go to each painting and apply certain areas with a pallette knife.
>"Paris Street Scene in the Rain" was my favorite. When all the color was
>applied we would take them over to the spay booth and apply a coate of
clear
>lacquer.
>
>The framming department was something else. We used the absolute cheapest
>pine moulding imaginable. Since I was itenerant (that's why I liked the
job,
>because I could 'not go to work' whenever I wanted and still have it) my
>Maestros in the Framing Department were all Mexicanos. These guys were
>incredible. They could take a piece of wood that was apple crate quality
and
>make it look like a piece of Honduras Mahogany. They learned this in the
>Mexican picture framing industry (LaLa land is just the northern reach of
>this). I don't know if anybody out there has ever tried gold-leafing with
>the imitation leaf that's available in hobby shops (brass) -- it's really
>impossible. But the Mexicanos could make it look like the real stuff.
***I've seen them do wonderfully amazing things with wrought iron, as well
and the "low-rider" automobile phenomenom is becoming an artform as well (I
read about an international exhibit in Tokoyo this year). My own experience
with this is several years ago I was in my carport intending to make 5 sets
of stretcher bars about 5' x 6'. I had a hand saw, no miter box, some
scotch joiners, brads, molding, wood glue, etc. I was sawing the wood and
my fingers to bloody stumps when a carfull of intoxicated Mexicans stopped
in front of my house (on the way to get more beer) to see what was happening
with a "woman" and "tools". They couldn't speak a word of English and my
Spanish is limited to cursing so with hand signals and showing them a
previously made stretcher bar and one with a painting on it, they laughingly
sent one of their group to get more beer (I was out) and started sawing,
hammering, etc. Those stretcher bars were built in a flash and S T U R D Y
!!! Lots of fun.
>So the paintings were marketed as 'Hand Painted Original Oils." They
>wholesaled for about 12 bucks to Motel chains and cheap restaurant chains
>etc. (I earned 1.49 per hours, which was minimum wage in 1961 -- but you
>could buy a snickers for then for a dime)
>One day I was bad-mouthing our products, and one of the owners overheard
me.
>I was working on my least favorite item - an absolutely hideous "Spanish
>Galleon" which was simply an obnoxious bright orange/yellow Tanguey
>background, with a ship screen printed in black. But the rigging was done
>this way: We had an appuratus that applied thick glue for the rope work,
>which made it 3D! When it dried, we would dry-brush on gold paint on the
>raised glue drippings. So I said to one of the ex-cons, "this is really a
>piece of shit, ins't it?" He didn't say anything, because one of the
owners
>was standing behind me.
***So, are you telling me that the ex-cons were #1 - smarter than you
because you got caught talking bad in front of the owners and they didn't..
and #2 - had better manners? <grin>
(The owners of the company were two Armenian
>supersalesmen and a graduate of a New York art school). So Bob (the owner)
>tells me "That sort of offends me, Erik. I've really put a lot of work
into
>this company. Did you ever think about how difficult it is to produce art
on
>the scale that we do here, and stay in business? I'm pretty proud of
myself
>for designing this whole procedure, and making it successful in a business
>environment. Just think about these things before you mouth off, will you!
>My hard work also gives you a job." I felt pretty small -- but I still
think
>that painting was ugly to the max.
>
>Every once in a while I check into a Motel and find these paintings on the
>wall. So for those who argue that the sign of great art is its lasting
>ability, think of this.
>
>Anyway, Bob Ross and the German fellow are a notch above this, I think.
But
>I forget the mention the funnest part of making these paintings. The
>signature. We used a script liner, and signed each painting (with illegible
>squiggles) "Picasso", "Rembrant" etc etc (even insulting remarks sometime -
>and laughed like hell at lunch break).
>
>So how's that for 'art hell,' Kay?
>
>Erik
You win the contest! You have truely paid your dues, Erik...
Kay
to reach me, remove 'rcd' from my e-mail address
mdeli
>I've seen mall art
>made in New York (it has also been made in Taiwan and Germany, I believe).
>This is the *genuine oil painting for $49.95, framed* stuff you see. Here's
>how it's done: a roll of canvas is rolled out and tacked up. Subject matter
>experts (!) move along in front of it, sometimes sitting on stools,
>sometimes standing. Someone paints all the skies. Next person paints the
>flowers, or little kids, or Paris Street scene, ocean, etc. Someone signs
>them with a fake name. When the paint dries, they roll up the canvas and
>ship it to a distribution point. Then it is cut up into individual
>paintings and framed with cheap stapled frames - and sold at art galleries
>in the malls! They work incredibly quickly - art students, starving
>artists, people with a knack for it, etc.
What's wrong with that? I painted square miles of anything including
abstract schmiers. I signed different names. It carried me over
because my serious paintings took time to do and sell.
If you have skill you can paint for a living. If you don't, you can
spend your life complaining that no one understands you.
Snip
> I think public television has an obligation to
>present real art, not fake art passed off as real (just my opinion).
>
I think any public discussion about real and fake art should invite
people from both sides.
Mani DeLi
...no skill no art
A Skeptical View of Modern Art was updated Jan.16,99
check out my new book, new work, new comments at:.
http://www.interlog.com/~hugod/
mdeli
>Erik,
>This is the funniest and most bizarre story I've heard in ages (and most of
>the bizarre experiences I read
snip
My book is full of funny stories. They aren't really bazarre if you
have some NY experience. Here is one.
"Many quirks lie behind success and the lack of success in Modern
Academic Art. An opening of an exhibition of paintings by an artist
named Vera is a good example. She could certainly draw better then
Pollock but lacked his skill and experience in promotion, socializing
and other matters. She just was not old enough to have been in the
right place at the right time. Her work did show more than usual
promise and certainly was not inferior to what was being shown at that
time in "better" uptown galleries, and Vera had more than a few well
positioned friends. But she was not a handsome woman and among other
things, by an awful coincidence, her name rhymed with schmierer and
worse everyone knew it; not good for getting on in the chi-chi world
of MAA
Her paintings conformed to any laws proscribed by the holy critics. It
could be classified as no-skill realism peering through an abstract
expressionist scaffolding. All were of a proper immensity and
unframed. Each contained just the right dose of contrived sloppiness
for an immediate critical affidavit of impeccable sincerity. All could
be said to exude abrasive emotion and experimental exuberance. They
were executed in a purist schmier technique with bold touches of
cutting impastos jutting well beyond the surface of the canvas or, as
they used to say in artsy surroundings, they passed the Buffet
"dangerous surface test." They were bound to draw blood if one
carelessly rubbed a bare arm across one of them.
The colors were predominately whitish impastos with a few bold bravely
placed snatches of primary colors on dusty puce dominated,
chop-suey-like backgrounds. Quite a bit of subject matter could be
made out in this murk, which might have been considered a mistake for
such a youthful artist. Fuzzy images of grossly overweight, nude
ladies inhabited most of these works. These images easily perceived by
anyone willing to make the effort of squinting, as the gallery was too
small for a spectator to stand very far back.
Some of the works had suggestions of extra sets of huge eyes, and one
striking canvas was dominated by a rotund, very Picassoid
bloody-looking foot cut at the ankle; the inside of which seemed
filled with organic chroma which was running down its side. It had an
effective addition in the guise of a particularly dangerously looking
impasted big toe.
There was something entirely peculiar and artistically
counter-intuitive about this show. It was so utterly forgettable that
to this day it sticks tenaciously in my mind.
Her paintings sold poorly if at all, caused no critical ripples and
were all well forgotten long before the official closing. When it was
over, the paintings returned to wherever Vera stored her large
permanent collection of Vera paintings.
Vera could, but for a few quirks, have made it to the stables of the
better galleries. Her name could easily substitute for the multitudes
of more successful non-entity Modern Artists who have inhabited the
MAA magazines of the last thirty years. Success in MAA greatly depends
on the peculiarities of probabilities."
Kay Kane
expecting someone to confess to this!
--
Kay
To reach me remove 'rcd' from my e-mail address
Leigh Kimmel wrote in message <_wyQ2.618$1X2....@news15.ispnews.com>...
>In article <L6vQ2.8400$Jc7.4...@news2.giganews.com>
>"Kay Kane" <scarl...@theriver.com> writes:
>
>> I always thought little elves did the paintings, like they did
>> shoes. Now, tell me who does (and how they do it) the paintings of
dogs(?)
>> playing pool, drinking beer and smoking cigars and I'll consider myself
very
>> knowledgeable about art.
>
>That's not hard. There's tons of animals-acting-like humans stuff on
>the furry (anthropomorphic animal) art sites. I do some of it myself --
>I quit for a while when I got hints from my fourth-grade teacher that I
>should "outgrow" drawing animal people, but I went back to it when I
>discovered that there were plenty of other people who did it, and even
>a market for it.
>
>Check out:
>
>www.furnation.com
>www.yerf.com
>etc.
>
>--
>One terrified boy, and a girl who would save him.
> "Claws of Vengeance" now available, http://www.alexlit.com/
>
>Leigh Kimmel -- writer, artist and historian
>kim...@globaleyes.net
>http://members.tripod.com/~kimmel/lhkwebpage.html
>Ask me how to order the new Sime~Gen novel!
>Check out my bookstore http://members.tripod.com/~kimmel/bookstore/
Leigh Kimmel
emat...@tomatoweb.com
"Kay Kane" <rcdsca...@theriver.com> wrote:
> Erik,
> This is the funniest and most bizarre story I've heard in ages (and most of
> the bizarre experiences I read about in this n.g. usually come from you!) I
> am printing this out, copying it, and handing them out to my students
> tonight. I always thought little elves did the paintings, like they did
> shoes. Now, tell me who does (and how they do it) the paintings of dogs(?)
> playing pool, drinking beer and smoking cigars and I'll consider myself very
> knowledgeable about art.
>
> And let's not fail to acknowledge that 1/2 hour superstar of acrylics -
> Brenda Harris! These people all have their own product line of paints,
> instruction books, videos, brushes, etc.. I am just amazed by the speed
> because I am a plodding person even at top speed (sometimes taking a year to
> complete a work).
> --
> Kay
I had the rare opportunity once of getting some Sumi brush lessons from a
master of abstract calligraphy, Gia Fu Feng. I think I went through 'bamboo'
and 'pollywogs.' Gia Fu patiently explained how to hold the brush, grind the
ink, and how to control the wet inks bleeding into the rice paper. It was
really fun -- very exciting when you finally got some results. It was very
much like this sort of automaton art we're talking about here -- I mean the
idea of an artist painting one part of a painting over and over again. I
wonder if Lucas Cranach's or Rubin's studios (factories) were set up like
that, as they ground out portrait series of Euopean royals?
I don't know about the dog paintings. The subject matter has even made it
over to tapistries. It would make a great art history study.
emat...@tomatoweb.com
"Kay Kane" <rcdsca...@theriver.com> wrote:
> ***I guess my liberalism will show up here, but, it would be nice if these
> ex-cons were given an arts education because it sounds like they were
> grabbing an identity, but no one would take them seriously (especially with
> the wages you mentioned). Isn't there a book out now in the top 10 written
> by a (former, I guess) homeless man?
>
No, I agree with you. I've known other convicts who took up art making, and
it is a very important and meaningful way to deal with society on a better
basis than crime. Here in California the prison system employs quite a few
MFAs to teach art inside, so the inmates get some very good instruction. But
you got to face it, there are not that many art jobs on the outside, so it
may not be as good as vocational rehabilitation as it is social
rehabilitation.
But on that particular job we used to share our 'real art' with each other,
and much of the stuff these guys did was pretty right-on. A lot of angst, if
you can imagine. A bit motorcyclese, but today that could be pretty
high-camp.
The last time I taught art I had two very loyal students who were both
bonefide schizophrenics, a husband and wife. They would sign-up for all my
classes (mostly I taught drawing and painting). They were both heavily
sedated all the time, and they were both outstanding artists, in my opinion.
The guy was also an ex-convict, a bank robber. They both liked to talk about
their insanity, also, and they could make you understand what it 'means' to
be insane. The woman was probably the better artist, I mean she was awesome.
But she didn't have the capacity to sustain any enthusiasm about her art
work. She would just dabble off masterpieces with a sort of 'ho - hum'
attitude, and if she wasn't in a classroom structure she would simply not
make art. He was a compuslive painter, and his work was pretty powerful,
also. The forms he created all had this kind of cactus quality, like if you
touched them you would be sorry, maybe even hurt. It was a pretty intriguing
experience for me. I liked them very much. Life was horribly difficult for
them, and I think the artwork was the only thing that kept them on track.
Now I'm still thinking about her responses to the dumbest assignments in
fundamentals of drawings, like 'atmospheric perspective' or 'modeling.' She
consistently would push the assignment to the edge, satisfying it, yet coming
up with something powerful that would knock my socks off. I had to restrain
myself, but everytime she would come off with her 'ho - hum' attitude I would
be crawling the walls inside. It seemed so unfair. Really remarkable
people.
Erik
April Showers
redi...@earthlink.net_xxx says...
>> Bill Alexander preceded Bob Ross. You have to admit that they had
>> the "Half-hour painting" technique down to a science. But then
>> you never saw them paint subject matter of a portraiture nature.
>> Then there is Helen Van Wyck who I don't think I've ever seen
>> finish anything in her half-hour spot. Come to think of it I don't
>> remember being able to watch her for the entire half hour.
>
>There is also a guy that literally paints with bunched up toilet paper..I
>think he may hold the Guinness world speed record...and it's wet into wet.
And don't forget all those quick-draw artists who work
the shopping malls, art fairs, county fairs, and even in
places like Disneyland/world. In fifteen minutes or less
they complete your portrait and often not a bad likeness
at that. I like the ones who do caricatures myself. If
you are good at it you can literally earn a living as a
gypsy doing 'honest' work -- by that I mean you can travel
where you like with your little portable easel and always
find an audience and customers in a crowded place.
I had a friend who traveled the USA doing quick portraits
and earned enough to support his wife and child in the
process. He eventually had to give up the nomadic life
and now he has a regular studio.
I remember the guy in Venice who did charcoal scenes of
the canal boats etc -- fully rendered scenes -- in FIVE
MINUTES! They were about 10 X 12 inch size and he sprayed
them with hairspray as a fixative and sold them as fast
as he could turn them out. It was amazing to watch the
speed with which he worked and the technical wizardry of
his manipulation of the charcoal sticks.
SVF814
rec.crafts.textiles.yarn
Larry Seiler
he
> used wet-on-wet technique (why not?) but did he complete a painting in
1/2
> hour?
When I paint plein air....as unpredictable as the sun is.....I try my very
best to have the painting completed enough in 1/2 hour to maintain the
integrity of the piece and what it was that caught my eye. Usually about 1
1/2 hours to 2....to complete start to finish.
(...and this, coming from a guy that used to put 200-300 hours into one
painting!)
But yes....I use a rag wrapped around my index finger and use turps and
paint to wash or block in masses, then paint mixed with copal medium to a
buttery consistency with palette knife and brushes.
It is much harder than perhaps many realize to attain a mastery of it, but
when it comes the image has a definite life of its own. Of course nothing
like the gimmicks of these television quirks.....for this as I'm
prescribing is an attempt to actually use one's eyes and aesthetic
development, and not rely upon simple symbols or suggestions.
peace,
Larry
April Showers
says...
>
>Helen Van Wyk is dead. Speak no evil of the dead.
>rec.crafts.textiles.yarn
So are Bill Alexander, Bob Ross and a host of other
artists. But these TV personalities live on in reruns.
Marilyn
Larry:
You are right that most people don't realize how much training
is needed for a painter to become 'spontaneous.' The Chinese however
will spend days, practicing brush strokes, page after page, and
then execute a painting in minutes. To me the training should be
in the artist, in his mind, eyes, hand with the painting showing
the spirit of the person, not just his/her virtuosity of technique.
M.
Any further response from MD/BC will be deleted unread.
Larry Seiler
> is needed for a painter to become 'spontaneous.' The Chinese however
> will spend days, practicing brush strokes, page after page, and
> then execute a painting in minutes. To me the training should be
> in the artist, in his mind, eyes, hand with the painting showing
> the spirit of the person, not just his/her virtuosity of technique.
I think this one aspect is one that makes being an artist for me one of the
loneliest pursuits.
I mean....I enjoy the isolation and "aloneness" of making art....but, as I
see more and more people feeding off of instant gratification, distancing
themselves from that which makes great people great....that is, "sweat" and
"discipline".....we are losing an ability or a bridge to dialog.
There simply is no idea at all among the lay person what sacrifices and
training/regimen many artists put themselves through. A passer-by saying,
"oh that's nice"....means only an attempt to say "hi!" and has little other
meaning for me. Nice that they're polite....but, one has to learn to push
oneself, critique oneself, stretch oneself more...and then later when very
few understand, credit oneself for the effort.
When I see a level of mastery in a work.....I immediately feel I know
something about this person, and share in that feeling of isolation one has
setting their sights so high.
Kinda like climbing mountains. So many at the bottom....excited about the
view looking up. Some climbing about 3,000 feet and giving up due to being
out of shape. Others working out intensely for a climb they anticipate one
day making. Eventually, those fit and prepared gain a height very few
attained.
They know of the cuts...the bruises. They know the intensity of a few
harrowing moments of potential death, and a muttered "thank you God!" when
spared one more time. They know that sensation looking out over clouds
below, seeing across peaks to peaks......and looking around, they notice
they are alone.
Eventually they climb down.....to the pats on the back. But, nothing
brings a smile like looking into the eyes of another climber...and just
knowing that the both of you "know!" A slight knodding of the heads says
volumes above the clamor of the recreational hikers.
Larry Seiler
> artists. But these TV personalities live on in reruns.
Is that a threat?
;^)
Larry
Jim Hurst
April Showers
Probably, if you watch TV. I don't.
burnin...@my-dejanews.com
Marilyn <m...@bc.ca> wrote:
(big snip)
> M.
>
> Any further response from MD/BC will be deleted unread.
Marilyn, I'm flattered! You should have directly told me you were ignoring me
as well as adding it to your .sig :P
CBan...@webtv.net
Kay Kane
struggles, but, speaking for myself, I find the "isms" of this century and
their struggles more interesting. Also, while Bob Ross is a figure I like to
make fun of, he does serve an important purpose in making people enjoy
"recreational/hobby" painting and for that, I'm glad.
--
Kay
To reach me remove 'rcd' from my e-mail address
Jim Hurst wrote in message
<5431-37...@newsd-253.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
Wow! This is quite a discussion on a subject matter that is
questionable. The discussion is as it should be, both pro and con.
As artists, we each have our own vision of what art is and is not. We
each have our own influences in the creation of our art. The influences
are derived from the world in which we live, and we each have our own
little world to influence us.
The influence of television has enlarged our world somewhat, letting in
the television painters to either inspire or anger us. And you
know...that's okay.
Why a discussion on Wet-On-Wet oil painting? When I think of a
Wet-On-Wet oil painter today, I think of the Impressionists of a century
ago. Monet, Renoir, and even Van Gogh shared a vision that was quite
unlike the "established" art critics of the day.
The impressionist had to endure published and unpublished remarks from
these traditional art critics calling the impressionists work as
"unfinished", "not fitting as wallpaper", "crude", etc. The
Impressionists networked together for support, often associating with
each other to share their struggles and vision.
The Wet-On-Wet painter today is receiving the same ctriticism from the
modern contemporary artists of today. It is good that a Wet-On-Wet
painter may want to share insight with other Wet-On-Wet painters as did
the Impressionists.
Wet-On-Wet does have its roots in Alla Prima, which has its roots in
Impressionism.
It is true that some people paint Wet-On-Wet look-a-likes that scream
Bob Ross or Bill Alexander, and you know, that's okay too. These people
are enjoying a method of painting that is enriching their lives. It's
just plain fun.
Then there are Wet-On-Wet painters who takes it to the next level, that
are works entirely their own.
It is okay to critic a particular piece of work, but those of you who
criticise a method of application need to read about the lives of the
Impressionists and their struggles.
Kay Kane
--
Kay
To reach me remove 'rcd' from my e-mail address
Larry Seiler wrote in message <7f8jk2$9...@newsops.execpc.com>...
>Also, while Bob Ross is a figure I like to
>> make fun of, he does serve an important purpose in making people enjoy
>> "recreational/hobby" painting and for that, I'm glad.
>> Kay
>
>well.....that's true Kay....as far as having serve a purpose and some
>people enjoying themselves.
>
>What really used to perturb me however, is that Bob Ross's stuff IMHO looks
>very amateurish with exception to beginners with no trained
>understanding/eye, and tuning in gave the impression that painting was
>"easy".
>
>As such...there are many confused people that think painting in general is
>therefore easy, and can't imagine why an artist might be asking a great
>deal of money for work.
>
>I think in a way....while the tv programs served one positive function as
>you say, they also served a negative function, I believe, in devaluing the
>depth and genius of actual artists.
Larry Seiler
Larry Seiler
> paintings I have spent weeks on and then others that I'm still painting
> from six months ago.
I agree with everything you said but this one thought.
I think after painting 700 paintings...perhaps 1/3rd with 100-300 hours in
each one....you can develop a genuis and an instinct that can be transfered
to a painting done in 30 minutes.
Thirty minutes to two hours is really all that a plein air painter has out
of doors with the changing of the sun, and I have seen many fine paintings
done in such time. Sheer genuis and mastery. It is now one thing I strive
for.
Jim Hurst
Leigh Kimmel
>very amateurish with exception to beginners with no trained
>understanding/eye, and tuning in gave the impression that painting was
>"easy".
>
>As such...there are many confused people that think painting in general is
>therefore easy, and can't imagine why an artist might be asking a great
>deal of money for work.
>
>I think in a way....while the tv programs served one positive function as
>you say, they also served a negative function, I believe, in devaluing the
>depth and genius of actual artists.
Part of the problem is a lack of understanding of the difference
between art done for fun, for one's own enjoyment, in whih enjoying the
process of painting is the goal, and professional-level painting which
demands a much more ezacting level of technique. One might compare it
to the difference between a fun game of ball with friends and playing
in the pros.
Also, in many of these areas, part of being a pro is making it look
effortless, to know it so well that you no longer have to visibly
struggle.
(sorry about the misspellings -- my keyboard is dying and some letters
won't register any more)
Larry Seiler
> painting due to frustration over teachings from art schools and
> colleges.
and there are many reasons for this.....one, because of trends pushed by
grant-writing professors
however...let me say something that is sure to start a "firestorm"...
a person that is an artist....has an obsession lurking within that cannot
long be stiffled or shutdown.
Some quotes.....
"The artistic temperament is a disease which afflicts amateurs"
GK Chesterton
"I will be an artist or nothing!" Eugene O'Neill
"Destiny is what you are supposed to do in life. Fate is what kicks you in
the ___ to make you do it. Henry Miller
A person that allows for one individual to cause him to step off the
rigors, the torments, and demands that will fall upon an artist choosing
thereafter never to pursue art making is not likely then to be an artist
anyway.
Bill Cosby once said that he didn't know the key to success, but "the key
to failure is trying to please everybody"
What hits students about art schools/colleges and causes them to want to
quit is sensing this abboration and hideous idea of needing to please this
teacher, that approach, etc; BUT....what I'm saying is...whether it was
Bob Ross or anyone else that reinspired.....the inspiration was simply
waiting for an excuse such as Bob anyway....because the true artist cannot
but help being an artist, and maybe holding his/her talents hostage with
some excuse.
I decided inspite of my professors insistence that I ought to be squirting
paint in manure and throwing it at the canvas like other students, to check
out books and rebel by copying printed images of the masters at my easel in
the midst of it all. I was written up as the one regret and black sheep of
the student senior show. If indeed art is sometimes about rebellion
though, I imagine I exemplified it more!
> Then they try the Wet-On-Wet method, and something "clicked".
> They gain renewed confidence and continue on...
and that is good...and I don't deny that flipping a station on tv, or
seeing an image in a magazine....or a show might trigger that need inside
to reclaim one's existence as an artist.
I guess though I don't regard the potential of one to be an artist entirely
rests upon the excuse of blaming it all on a school...etc;
I may hate working at a particular fast food restaurant, but I will not
decide to quit eating. That is what the need to create and be an artist is
like for me, and those kind of passions are what calls me to push myself,
discipline myself, and focus on striving for something better and higher of
myself.
Tell an artist he/she cannot....and likely he/she will prove that indeed
they can!
> Bob Ross has never said that painting is easy.
never said he did.....BUT, packaging it up nice and neatly to fit in a 30
minute formats week after week....inferred it was easy enough to not fear
trying it.
For the many that do not buy his painting sets....his magic white, etc; but
after watching several shows call up the local golf course to set up their
tee time, THEY are the ones left with the idea that painting is "easy." It
is an inference opinion from what they see, and in time this created a
cultural mind set.
The implication of "happy accidents" with no need to resist them does no
justice to the fact that as artists- many of us proclaim a holy war against
all such lacking of control over the medium and situation. It speaks
nothing of our obsession to buy and horde art magazines, books, visit
museums and galleries, the library to find a means to "rid" ourselves of
that one thing that is keeping us from stepping up to the next level. I
proclaim a curse upon that unwelcome accident.
Experimentation is one thing...is fun, and good......but accidents are a
sign of the medium winning the war.
Also....if viewers could see Ross setting up his easel with a painting
partner whom was a "good" plein air painter...in Yosemite park to paint a
mountain/lake scenic....we would see how "cartooney" Ross was. He mastered
selling himelf and marketing more than good draftsmanship and aesthetics.
These programs simply did not foster respect at all for what the demands
and rigor of painterly realism requires. They sold oil painting sets, and
established mediocrity as the new standard of excellence.
I have met student after student that has estimated themselves having
"arrived" and becoming unteachable....not able to see that something could
be improved.
I am at total peace with the idea that such persons are enjoying making
art. I advocate all people enjoy the arts and artmaking. I believe it
good for them. If many gazillion people go out and buy Ross oil painting
sets, I hope they paint their little hearts out, and find solace and
refreshment.
I simply am speaking about whether or not it has been of service to help a
populace/culture understand and respect "good painting." I say that it has
not, it simply has lowered the bench mark and made many untrained eyes
think something mediocre is good.....and "AS" good as actually "good"
works.
Note please.....I am not speaking of contemporary abstract art versus
realism and interested in engaging in a "what is art" debate? The truth
is....I believe there is good abstract fine art.....and bad, and there is
good and bad realism.
There simply are good and bad examples found in all styles.
He did say that
> Wet-On-Wet oil painting is very learnable, and teachable. Being such,
> many people are enjoying an activity that they never thought they could
> do.
and enjoying has its merits. I am glad for them. Again....I'm speaking of
whether or not it fosters respect for "good" painters. I am saying the
impression of those viewers that will not enter the activity or only dabble
will not. Even dabblers will respect good artists as being "artists" like
themselves, but not be able to tell why a piece is good or not.
> There are many Wet-On-Wet painters who learned the technique via Ross or
> Alexander who after learning the fundamentals, "broke away" and explored
> their own vision. Others simply stayed withen the style of Ross enjoying
> it for what it is.
the experience was only the excuse they needed to realize their proper
destiny or calling....Ross the impetus or inspiration. Again good they try
it.
> The Wet-On-Wet method is only a doorway. One that is available for those
> who wish to open it.
well...I certainly am painting wet on wet these days.....but don't think of
it that way. Simply Alla Prima....simply painterly realism, and certainly
no "mighty white!"
take care.....
Larry Seiler
> One might compare it
> to the difference between a fun game of ball with friends and playing
> in the pros.
I think a good point. Yes....there is a difference between recreational
painters, and the pros. If such a distinction could be clearly drawn...it
would lessen confusion.
> Also, in many of these areas, part of being a pro is making it look
> effortless, to know it so well that you no longer have to visibly
> struggle.
As does Michael Jordan taking to flight from the freethrown line to dunk a
basketball. We seem to know right off the impossibility of such for
ourselves, but that which artists do with apparent ease is not so easily
recognized as due to their experience and mastery.
peace,
emat...@tomatoweb.com
"Larry Seiler" <lse...@execpc.com> wrote:
Larry, a lot of this popular notion about art/fun comes from our school
system. "Art" was always proposed as recreation since the first grade. It's
no wonder that the public, generally, thinks of art as recreation. And it
can be recreation, of course.
I had a long war with the California Department of Vocational Rehabilitation
about 'art as work' since, even programatically, the idea of art as
recreation was implicit in their policies. I finally had to bring up the
federal labor codes under "Artist" (subcategories: painter; sculputor;
printmaker) and throw them in their faces. And I eventually won, and I was
the first person in CA history to obtain a training subsidy to pursue art
studio. The compromise I had to make was to agree to seek employment as an
art teacher rather than artist -- pretty ironic, huh?
But I've always thought of art as work. When I studied art history in grad
school the idea of work became even more apparent. But as work, making art
doesn't seem to me to be a corollary of ideas of 'genius' or 'obsession' or
'compulsion' or even 'self-expression.' It's just work -- why valorize it
more than you would any other profession or trade? Those fuzzy notions seem
to address more the mystique about the 'artist in society' than they do art
making. I'm saying this because I have personally known many fine artists in
my life who are not obsessed with making art, are not genuises, are not
'compelled to express themselves' etc. Just nice people who approach art
making with a very workpersonlike attitude.
Erik Mattila
Leigh Kimmel
emat...@tomatoweb.com writes:
> I had a long war with the California Department of Vocational Rehabilitation
> about 'art as work' since, even programatically, the idea of art as
> recreation was implicit in their policies. I finally had to bring up the
> federal labor codes under "Artist" (subcategories: painter; sculputor;
> printmaker) and throw them in their faces. And I eventually won, and I was
> the first person in CA history to obtain a training subsidy to pursue art
> studio. The compromise I had to make was to agree to seek employment as an
> art teacher rather than artist -- pretty ironic, huh?
Part of it may be just that it's easier for the Powers that Be to
recognize your efforts as Work when you have a boss and a timeclock,
than when you're on your own. Also, when working under the domination
of a boss, you are getting a regular paycheck, instead of being paid
catch-as-catch-can.
We as a society have so internalized the hireling model of work that we
have trouble understanding that people who work on their own are really
working, and that people whose temperments do not suit them to work
under close supervision *aren't* lazy and shiftless.
April Showers
kim...@mail.globaleyes.net. says...
>We as a society have so internalized the hireling model of work that we
>have trouble understanding that people who work on their own are really
>working, and that people whose temperments do not suit them to work
>under close supervision *aren't* lazy and shiftless.
I find that preposterous, but you are entitled to YOUR OPINION.
I wonder how many agree with you? In the USA 'entrepeneurs' of
whatever stripe are envied by the poor 'hirelings' you refer
to. And I would certainly place full-time working artists into
the entrepreneural mold albeit at the less-lucrative end
of it. I don't know of anyone who would accuse a successful
entrepeneur of being shiftless or lazy. Just the opposite
in my experience. They are usually the 'go getters' who won't
take NO for an answer.
Larry Seiler
I enjoyed your sharing your experiences....man, interesting thing you went
through in California.
> But as work, making art
> doesn't seem to me to be a corollary of ideas of 'genius' or 'obsession'
or
> 'compulsion' or even 'self-expression.' It's just work -- why valorize
it
> more than you would any other profession or trade?
Well...I guess what I'm suggesting is.....one can quit a job....quit
certain work, and go on to other pursuits with hardly a second thought of
the job they quit. But when I use the idea of passion or obsession....I
mean its not something you can just walk away from. Its so deep....its
inside....its gotta come out, won't go away.....and you deny yourself
trying to walk away from it. For example....you drive by a field....your
passenger sees some dumb ole' cows chewing cud....you see deep cool hues in
the shadows of meadows edge trees contrasting with the effect of low level
sun on rich alphalfa's warm green..and the impression haunts and taunts and
mocks that you must drive by n'er to chance paint it! Your head turns to
strain one more last look. You missed all of whatever your friend was
saying.
> Those fuzzy notions seem
> to address more the mystique about the 'artist in society' than they do
art
> making.
Well.....I'm not so concerned with my own mystique, but I am telling you I
am obsessed. For me art is a vehicle for celebrating life.....for
maintaining thanksgiving in my heart....for stirring and igniting passion.
Something about "paint" and touching something of the spirit of the scene.
To discover the visual aesthetics of what it is that captures my attention.
Seeking the hidden secrets. Obsessed.
I'm saying this because I have personally known many fine artists in
> my life who are not obsessed with making art, are not genuises, are not
> 'compelled to express themselves' etc. Just nice people who approach art
> making with a very workpersonlike attitude.
Well...for nearly 20 years I've been this "wildlife artist".....and I know
full well what you are saying. Competition forced me into a mode of
"one-up-manship" and I photographed outdoors, sketched, hoarded resources
and information, had my contacts with the department of natural resources
to study specimens, etc; It was very much like work. The creative aspect
was done basically the first couple days of a large painting, and the
200-300 hours of time necessary to complete it became discipline.
In fact....I listened to talk programs on the radio....to music. As a
musician also listened and thought about music. The work demanded nearly
almost more commitment to work and endure the process to completion than
any tactile sense of joy I had with the medium itself. I learned to paint
day in day out...and wee hours of the night.
So...yes, art can be simply work.
I sense now however looking at my old work.....a stagnant image. It
represents a strong work ethic....but, it lacks evidence of joy artmaking
can bring. It shows the emphasis I had on always believing someday hard
work would pay off.....living for the product, that advancements...but not
necessarily learning to be thankful for the very opportunity to paint
itself.
Since I began painting outdoors....colors are even different to me.
I used to paint for hours under a flourescent light. We all know how such
distorts color....but I painted intelligently, knowing what a color was and
how it was mixed, and if it looked good on the palette in lieu of the
flourescent light, and good on the canvas....it looked good when taken
outside in natural light. The colors of the tube were all relative because
of seeing it all under the same flourescent light.
However.....after painting the last several years outdoors something more
about the emotion of the spirit of what gives a scene life has entered into
my awareness and is attached to color and light.
The other night....I came home with a painting I thought I'd finish in my
studio. I put the painting on the easel under my flourescent lamp and
turned it on. I nearly gagged! I could not paint. The impression of the
scene on location was immediately lost to me.
I guess what I'm saying is a hint or whisper of that which says, "paint
me!" has been more recognized in natural light, painting live.
What that did was create a new renaissance for me. By learning the essence
of that spirit of a scene before me alla prima or live, I can imitate a
painterly strong illusion of realism that is convincing in less than two
hours, because that "essence" is captured.....whereas all the 200 hours or
more in my studio painting with all the careful attention to detail seems
to miss.
On one hand....work and discipline to work.....on the other hand, passion
and no choice but to yield to the work.
I'm reading a huge book on John Singer Sargeant right now, and he became
independently wealthy painting his portraits, but practically gave the
doing of them up the last 20 years of his life to turn his attention
instead to landscape painting. He had been given royal awards and was
considered the finest portrait painter, and he walked away from it. To
him.....portraiture had become work.....but the spirit of the scene as a
plein air painter became passion.
Initially....or in the young stages of an artist's life however, will come
many discouragements from pursuing art. Whether it is to be a life's
discipline to work.....or the passion to necessarily work, I believe there
is a type of calling or a coming out from the human machine of the ordinary
life....the existence to exist such that one might exist yet one more day.
Such a need for meaningful existence and purpose, that will not be detered
by the "discouragers". In fact, becoming more determined the more the
discouragers intensify their attacks.
Art is a lonely pursuit. A life in isolation. No cheerleaders. Fanfare
one day, but alone the next. One must learn routinely to work.....whether
in discipline or by passion regardless of the forces that would deny
him/her.
thanks Erik....I appreciate your input which in turn primed my thoughts and
helped me work through some ideas.
peace,
emat...@tomatoweb.com
"Larry Seiler" <lse...@execpc.com> wrote:
> Erik.....
> I enjoyed your sharing your experiences....man, interesting thing you went
> through in California.
>
You seem to be writing my autobiography -- how dare you. No, really, that
was a wonderful message that I needed to hear.
For some strange reason I have it on my mind that landscape painting is the
penultimate. I think, as I run through the litany of artistic experiences I
have had, in viewing art, the landscape has loomed predominate in my mind's
eye. I realize that this is very personal. Even figurative painting I most
admire has a landscape quality. It may be simply that I find geology awesome
-- I mean the size and scale of geological events give me that wonderful
feeling in insignificance. At any rate, the experiences you describe make me
drool.
emat...@tomatoweb.com
Strangely, I agree with both your and Leigh's observations. I think Leigh
had a pretty solid grip on the problem of the bureaucrat, especially in an
institution like the department of Vocational Rehabilitation.
Cal Rehab has a policy of 'the least amount of training for entry level
positions' in their programs. My argument to Cal Rehab was that this was a
discriminatory policy, since it condemmed its clients to sub-poverty level
employment. The insanity of this policy plays our because many disabled
persons are intelligent enough to understand that the quality of their lives
would be better if they simply elected to decline vocational rehabilitation
and continue on government subsidies such as Supplemental Security Income or
Disability payments. Often, the expense of holding a job and suffering the
costs of transportation, taxes, clothing and all that mean that if you are
earning minimum wages you will actually have less left over for discretionary
spending than if you simply sat on your ass and received your government
checks every month.
Anyway, I think that Leigh was citing very accurately the mentality of the
bureaucrat ( which is not the same mentality of the human being that is
employed as a bureaucrat, ironically). In this sense her comments are very
accurate to my experience -- there is that assumption, which is enforced by
policy, to only see 'vocational rehabilitation' in terms of time-clocks. But
look at the situation form the case worker's point of view. If I am
rehabilitated to be self-employed, they can never submit a report that says I
am successfully rehabilitated. And that is exactly what the case worker is
required by their superiors -- to produce evidence of the success of their
programs.
Larry Seiler
> You seem to be writing my autobiography -- how dare you. No, really,
that
> was a wonderful message that I needed to hear.
hahaha....
> For some strange reason I have it on my mind that landscape painting is
the
> penultimate. I think, as I run through the litany of artistic
experiences I
> have had, in viewing art, the landscape has loomed predominate in my
mind's
> eye. I realize that this is very personal.
yes...
> Even figurative painting I most
> admire has a landscape quality.
yes....and especially if painted alla prima...or in live sittings-
blocking in the masses, choosing the essentials and that unnecessary to
good composition, etc;
> It may be simply that I find geology awesome
> -- I mean the size and scale of geological events give me that wonderful
> feeling in insignificance.
I am propelled to discover what makes a scene breathtaking, and often it
hits me that I am about to tackle something monumental or overwhelming. I
think what helps me is knowing ahead of time I'm limited to this small
panel or canvas because of the sun's movement, giving me less than two
hours. That sets me up immediately to give myself permission to be more
"expressive" or less literal, and go for the jugular so-to-speak. Amazing
thing is.....I'm learning just how demanding my inner voices had been, and
that I actually had to seek the means to give myself permission. When that
happened, I was able to make a deal with the overwhelming information that
a scene would throw at me, to make things a simpler statement.
> At any rate, the experiences you describe make me
> drool.
go for it....its like a breath of fresh air!
Jim Hurst
Larry Seiler
> Wet-On-Wet method. Though I mostly paint in my studio, the few times
> that I did paint on site outdoors gave my paintings a certain "sparkle"
> and look that is not acheived through memory or from photgraphs.
Hi Jim....
That "sparkle" is the spirit or life of the scene that light gives, that
living things give...that spontaneity of the artist's skill touches
> Perhaps a combination of the two, with live studies outside that is
> brought back into the studio for completion.
Oh yeah...I have the habit of taking a photograph of the scene itself
before I start and after. Then back in the studio if I opt to do a larger
image for perhaps a gallery consideration, I've got the sense of color and
light as the eye saw it (for film chemistry is no where near the capability
of the eye), and details to refer to for larger work.
> The few times that I did paint outdoors did tend to draw a crowd, which
> I found sparked an interest in some of the onlookers to give oil
> painting a shot. Sharing not only the finished painting, but the
> proceess itself, is a thrill!
Hey....you know what I discovered? That crowd that tends to draw does
something that many galleries do not....that having a studio/gallery in
front of my home does not...it invites curiousity and human interest. This
in turn acts as a form of advertisement. I was painting along one creek in
particular about a week ago when a big pickup truck stopped up on the road
above me. A guy worked his way down toward me and I thought, uh-oh....
He asked (of course he knew), if I was the guy painting on a bridge
overlooking the creek two weeks before? Of course....and he asked if I
still had that painting and would consider selling it. Well..... there
you go! He gave me his name, phone number, introduced himself as a
landowner with some unique views of a river and invited me to feel welcome
to explore and paint on his land!
I'm starting to think from the standpoint of promoting the arts, sparking
interest in aesthetics among the populace, (which is one function for which
an artist is suppose to do) and possible sales......that I can't afford NOT
to be out at least once per week.....maybe several times!
Last night.....on an obscure back country road, I was painting the effects
of light on these big brook side trees and reflection. Gorgeously colors.
Textbook warm and cool contrasts. It wasn't nearly as obscure as I
thought, and several vehicles stopped to look...give a friendly greeting,
admire what the progress was.
Later I watched about eight whitetail deer run and play in a nearby field,
jumping up on their hindlegs and pawing at each other...something like
puppies.
You see things refined to an easel outdoors that most people don't see or
hear.
Of course....sometimes people stopping by can be an intrusion, especially
as you get into a flow or the sun is so low that each minute is critical.
But usually I find people can read your body language and can tell when you
are intensely engaged.
Larry Seiler
> I enjoyed your comments very much.
> Besides the obsession with beautiful views
> and landscapes as you have,
thanks.....
just sharing a passion...
> I keep seeing
> faces and objects in the folds of curtains, the
> shapes of clouds, and in the shadows of trees.
> I haven't actually allowed myself to sit down and
> draw them, but they do grab my attention.
hahaha.....I usually have that experience with tiles on restroom floors!
;^)
> I keep finding the hidden objects, even though
> they aren't really there. <G>
Hhhmmmm.....that's sorta like patrons for me. If I only had a dollar for
everyone that admires "what" I'm doing but not enough to buy!
Colorado huh? I have a friend that now lives and works in the prison
system in Canon City...he's been trying to lure me over, talks of Salida,
Colorado Springs.
Of course everything sounds better from a market standpoint when you live
and work as an artist in Green Bay Packer good ole Wisconsin beer country!
Thinkin' of some kind of move......
take care....!!
Jim Hurst
CBan...@webtv.net
