Thanks,
Steve
Lauraley© Online Art Gallery
www.lauraley.com
The intent of Lauraley© Online Art Gallery web site is to promote artists
and sell art. If you are interested in being represented contact me by
E-mail at Laur...@lauraley.com
Thank you, Lauraley
>
Think of classical training, where one becomes, perhaps, competent or perhaps
even a virtuoso with a given instrument.
Think also of jazz and blues, where one explores not only the traditional
approach to a given piece, but also improvisations.
Think then of rock - there are some outstanding players, aren't there?
Now think of John Cage - sound compositions with no relationship to
traditional patterns, timings, notation - sound, of and for itself.
That latter might apply to non-objective artwork, what some people call
abstract. The word "abstract" would indicate that it is "drawn from" something
else - and these can be physical, emotional, intellectual.
And that first item would perhaps be analogous to classical painting - the
"academy school," historical, allegorical, religious, with a high polish.
You can draw the other parallels, if you wish - with perhaps impressionism,
"abstract expressionism", et cetera.
But then it all comes down to communication. What do you have to say? Probably
not much, just yet. But as you explore the materials and styles as you gain
skills with the materials, you will find your voice. And you will know how to
answer the question you now ask of Us.
Re: abstracts, as much nonobjective painting is called these days - get a good
book on the fundamentals of design. Paintings "about painting" often address
the challenges touched on in good design books. The major elements of visual
works, such as but not limited to shape, color, line, balance, intensity,
simultaneous contrast and so on can be the area of exploration. Then take a
look at "modern art history" from, say the 1950's on, and in particular the
Pacific Coast painters of the 1960s and 1970s. Diebenkorn - What were they
trying to say?
Look at Estes and Cottingham. Not abstract, but not classical either -
Photorealism had something to say about our world of that time, a social
commentary in the form of a scene that was as dead as a photograph (maybe?)
made larger-than-life and demanding attention - what were they trying to say?
Then look at Pearlstein, and then at Wayne Thiebaud. And keep painting! At some
point your work will make a dramatic leap because understanding will feed your
imagery (remember that epiphanous moment when you "understood" jazz?) Then you
will make concious decisions as well as taking intuitive leaps.
There are many "how to paint" books in the art store - grab a couple and follow
the directions. You may reject this approach later, but it's a good way to get
to know your materials. May I humbly suggest that you work first on mastering
form and light? You show a hint of that approach in the Robin Williams painting
- take it further, until you've followed the path to its end or to a fork in
the road.
====>James
Steve
PhtgrphrBn <phtgr...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020515151659...@mb-mn.aol.com...
> Stay away from abstract.
The truth about the Robin Williams painting is that I took a photo and
pulled it into CorelTrace, set the tolerances to my liking and basically
made myself a paint-by-numbers by printing and tiling the vector lines.
My fooling around with painting exactly that: fooling around. I am rather
like the composition student who writes with only a little bit of aesthetic
understanding but no real skill - when I paint. However, I certainly don't
take it seriously and I do have fun. This whole art baffles me and I am in
awe of those that have real skill. Is it possible to develop it or is it
simply too late? Should I just spend some time with a pencil and a piece of
paper? Where does one truly start?
It's fun not knowing much about what I'm doing for a change. ;)
Thanks for your reply.
Steve
James M. Glenn <silv...@micronospamserve.net> wrote in message
news:3CE3207D...@micronospamserve.net...
No, it's not too late, but as with music, it's not as easy as it may seem.
What fun it is to sit at a piano (unskilled and untaught) and randomly play
made up chords, striving for excitement one moment, serinity the next, maybe
a little rhythm tossed in. And although you know it isn't really music, it's
tolerable to your own ear... but horrible noise to the people in the same
house with you! This is what I see in your paintings. The joy of creation
but just a bit noisy. Well, maybe a lot noisy. I would encourage anyone with
the desire to paint to go for it, but do consider learning a few harmonious
chords in the process. It's okay to be self taught in these early stages.
It's not okay to just sit there and make a horrendous noise.
L.