I have questions.

As an artist, is it possible to separate emotions from intellect?

Is that separation worth pursuit? 

Hmm?

Does a painter not observe before even sketching the beginning?

Have you seen an idea without an emotion?

Math can be loved;

but,

can Love be reduced to a formula?

Reading

 What could an examination of The Wealth of Nations contribute to art?

Art does not exist in a vacuum.   Also, it is a commodity of sorts.  If nothing else, it provides a framework for creating something people want.

Finished Piece

oil paint on 8 by 10 inch canvas
Study of Brown and White
 

 

Notes on Ink Experiments

I have been experimenting with color inks.  They are similar to watercolors, but not quite the same.  

Ink on 4 by 6 inch water color paper
Colors Green Orange Black

There is a potential for expressive, spontaneous work here.  You cannot correct this medium, even less than watercolor.  Once a line is down its down and you work with it.   It's either that, or plan for weeks to do one hours worth of work.  If this was pencil or charcoal, I would be erasing lines that make me unhappy.  So, the more inflexible the medium, the more potential for spontenaity.

Green ink on 9 by 12 inch watercolor paper
Color Green

Color fields, like the one shown above, are interesting.  In my opinion these types of paintings need to be large scale, even more than what I am working with.  The ink tends to break into primary colors in spots.  I am not sure why.  Its not a bad effect.

The field of color style is a time investment.  Lay down a layer, dry, Laydown a layer. and so on until I am satisfied.  The effect is incredible 

oil paint on 8 by 10 inch panel
Blue yellow white

As a contrast to the green study, the above oil painting has a more solid feel, where color peeks through solid layers.  I would say the green is glowing.

This one, with the sloppy presentation, is not a particularly great piece.  I include it to make a note of the medium's tendency to darken as one adds layers.  Also note that dark black ink will not fade as layers are added,  Just some things to keep in mind.

Learning From History

  

  

Artist: J. M. W. Turner
Landscape with Water
19th Century Master, considered a precursor to the twentieth century abstract movement.

There is more history and technique represented in this digital reproduction than I can do justice to.  The original is in London, England.  An example of a scumbling technique that this particular artist was fond of using, he seems to capture the form without being overly detailed. 

What I find interesting about this painting are:

• The limited pallet.
• It is a landscape.
• Painted on site, quickly I think.

Of course, I am not a 19th century painter; nor, do I have his background as a house painter.  He knew his materials.  

Artists and commercial painters are separated in this modern era; but, only by convention.  Honestly, I don't quite understand why.  Both professions have to clean brushes, match colors, mix paint, etc.  

Back to the subject.  

A limited pallet is capable of a huge range of effects.  I'm not buying a lot of different paints.  And, I can pay attention to form.

Landscapes are based on a set of perceptual principles, which can be extrapolated to form a personal set of rules.  It doesn't have to be a landscape painting to follow them.

Painting on site is not something I have a lot of opportunities to do.  But, it does suggest to me that painting what you see is an important activity in my development.  

Painting quickly.  I need to think about that one.  Also, paint quickly a few times.  I know helps a lot in drawing exercises.  

  

oil paint on 11 by 17 inch panel
Title: TBD

 What is the point of Art?

Currently artists tend toward defining themselves as challenging the status quo, rebelling against the Establishment.  The response of the establishment is to buy the Art, collect it, and sell it for a profit.  Not all do that, but enough to establish a stereotype.

I find this puzzling.

"The story" these days is for an artist to start in the street as a graffiti artist chased by the police.  Working his/her way into galleries and public acclaim by talent and perseverance.  

This sounds suspiciously like a retelling of the rags to riches stories found in nineteenth century publications.  But, how many people actually fit those stories?  Rags to riches stories are about hope, not reality.  

What I suspect is happening.

The actual career path for an artist involves a rather expensive education and acquiring marketing skills, along with connections to people who actually purchase art.  It's not mandatory to follow that path; but, it is easier to convince people you are an artist when you have a degree.  Artists as a group fit neatly into an existing social order, sometimes embraced or sometimes tolerated, but always recognized by the people who support Art (As customer or as Patron) and are people in the upper levels of society and politics.  The Art they acquire inevitably supports their own beliefs, or in the case of politics, beliefs they want people to think they have.

What Next?

I am a little jaded, but I have been alive awhile; and, that happens to people who face reality.   

So, my question is:  Does Art serve as a means of propping up social and political order?  Obviously, historically, Art has served that purpose for Religion and State.  The big dogs in Patrons.  

In this Republic that still values democratic principles (I hope.), Art does not appear to support either the state or religions given the small financial support from both.  (Compared to what authoritarians and monarchies spend on public art.  This is not judgement of current government spending,)  Support for Art in this republic appears to come from loosely organized groups of communities, or voters if political oriented, reinforcing that communities values.  

From this point of view, the Artist could be a "voice in the wilderness" calling for people to get ready.  

Well, I probably need to test this more, but it feels right. 

 

  

Researching Art Sales

Why should someone buy my art?  

I have spent so much time just drawing for myself, that the question never occurred to me.  Oddly, the question must have been asked in that abyss we call the subconscious mind.   It's amazing what can surface from that darkness.

I Googled the question.

Ink Study on paper
Early 2000

There are a lot of writings on the subject available.  Too much to read in a lifetime.  Almost all of the writers I looked at were marketers.   In fact, I don't remember reading anything from the artist's point of view.  I don't trust marketing writers.  Probably a bit paranoid on my part; but, why would someone tell me how to do what they get paid to do?  

So, let's start with the following question:  Why do I buy art?  That is easier for me to answer.

• Because I like the piece.
• Because I can afford the price.
• Because I have room for it.

After I display a piece,  the art affects the room I am in.  I can't help but to notice that.  It has not lead to a planned interior design, mainly because I kind of like how things develop over time without planning.  

There are people who plan every detail of their lives.  I don't understand the impulse, but they get real frustrated when things don't go as planned.

Abstract Oil Painting
2020

That suggests to me that there may be more to that than meets the eye.  If one of those people buys my art, it's because something in my art fits their plan for a room, house, or even their life.   Not really a collector, but a decorator or designer.

Some people are not as concerned about an orderly life.  One collector, an owner of a famous art gallery in NY City, would just fill a room with purchased art, no plan.  Everything was just stacked in, like a chaotic warehouse.  Yet, his business thrived.  He just purchased pieces that caught his eye. 

I have no idea what would appeal to this type of collector, no idea how to get my work in front of one, and no idea if that would be worth the effort..

I have used two very broad terms for describing people who buy art:

Designer:  The plan drives the art.

Collector:  The art drives the plan, if there is a plan.

Are such labels really necessary?  Well, yes if you want to understand something.  Besides, they are more of spectrum than set definitions.  Most people are not so extreme.

So a designer can be a professional decorator or a licensed designer, a D.I.Y. junkie etc.  The difference lies in training and legal definitions for licensing.  Corporations who collect art, well invest in art, on a regular basis fit into the designer category by using professional curators to evaluate art in terms of corporate image and monetary value.    

A collector can be anyone.  They may or may not have guidelines.  They may or may not display their collection.   They may be looking for the latest thing, for a certain style, for historical period, or what ever catches their eye.  

So how is this analysis applied?  It's no good unless some action is applied.

First decide who you want to appeal to.   Adjust your sales pitch to their needs.  More research will be needed.

Don't change your work to fit them, just the sales pitch.   Your art is your art.

Second  Research how people purchase art.  Professional designers have markets that cater to them which are different from DIY markets.  While a collector might need a more personal approach.

Of course, this is just me trying to grapple with the issues.  It's a work in progress.   There will be a lot left out of this article, but one thing is certain, you have to put in the effort.  

The Idea Is Not As Important As The Follow through

A few photographic studies from my past.  The idea is to invite comparison between the objects.  Of course, they were not as successful as I hoped for at the time.  Still, I think the idea is valid, just not well executed.

Photography requires planning, especially in studio work where the objects and environment are controlled.  My temperament tends to support the more impulsive side of life.  Yet, this might be good for me to try again.  Just to shake things up.

 

What Is Beauty These Days

Flowers Floating on A Reflection

What is Beauty?   It's a word.  It was important in the 19th century.   

Today, it's worn out from overuse.  A girl once said to me that inner beauty is more important than outer beauty; and, in the same breath said that beauty is only skin deep.   I was a boy at the time, but the phrases stuck with me.

There is real conflict in those phrases.  

She was talking about a friend who was less than attractive in her eyes.  I had to take her word for it.  

What a crappy way to see a friend.  Maybe, she really wasn't seeing her friend.  People tend to not see people they are familiar with.

Why did she use the phrase inner beauty?  There is no inner beauty. Even if it exists, there is no way to perceive such a thing without a physical expression.   

There are two things I believe about beauty.

        1.    Beauty is a surface effect.

        2.    It has a biological/perceptual basis.

The only time I think the concept of beauty has any real use is when I evaluate paintings or drawings that I intend to place for sale.  That would be when I am trying my hand at marketing.    

So, back to the girl with the crappy friend.  

I never actually met her friend.  She wasn't trying to match her up with me.  I don't have a clue as to what was going on.  It was important enough for her to say it out loud.   

Beauty does not lie at the core of anything, not human, not objects.  It is surface, like color.  A reflection of something.  It belongs in the world of art, design, and marketing.   It's about how we perceive objects.  

Random Musing On Art : Alfred Nobody

oil painting on 18 by 24 inch canvas
Style is not important in this case.
It is not titled nor for sale at this time.

Paintings might search for universal appeal, which is a type of artistic snipe hunt.

A snipe hunt, if you are not into camping, was a rite of passage for young boys of my generation.  It usually happens at night.  The boys are organized into groups.  Each boy is given two sticks and are instructed to bang them together in order to attract snipes.  The hunt usually lasts an hour, or more if the boys are unusually dense.  

Snipes don't exist in my part of the world, and until recently I didn't think they existed at all.  I am not sure what the point of snipe hunts were.   Perhaps, a mild hazing, and everyone felt a part of the group.

Universal appeal is thought unattainable, although people keep trying.  Not just artists, but sales and marketing chase that snipe.

If you truly believe that art is subjective, then universal appeal cannot be possible.  There are too many people in the world.

Is art really subjective?   

Dried Onion
Digital Photograph

How do we even contemplate anything if everyone sees something different?  No the image of the dried onion above is the same for everyone.  What reaction people have will be different, but it remains an image of a dried onion.

A search for universal appeal is not a snipe hunt.  What I am not sure of is what use it would be.  If everyone likes an image, it will be reproduced endlessly and fade into a rather pleasant background.  

If the internet has shown us anything useful, its that not being in the background gets you noticed.  Also, sex sells - but, then we have always know that.

Today's artists are looking for reactions.   

but

I think these are the big questions.

What are people who consume art looking for?  

Do we follow the money to find that out?  

Or, do we see what is searched for on the internet?

What about people who don't use the internet to look for art?  After all, being there is still a unique experience.  Also, just because the internet is not available to someone does not automatically exclude them from the art world.