 |
|||
|
|
Showing Our Humanness Eric: In my last article, I discussed several important principles helpful in developing a good composition. I mentioned that I would follow up in this article with some pointers on how to develop an area of dominance. I've chosen to discuss this at a later date and digress to a topic that represents a weakness I am seeing in the art world, especially in my chosen profession of watercolor. Namely, it seems to me that we artists are afraid to show our humanness. Take a look at the show catalogues represented by prestigious watercolor societies in this country. The careful degree of finish in execution is astounding, almost to an airbrush refinement. No error in judgment seems to be allowed by the artist (or judge, for that matter). Although many of these paintings are beautiful in execution, and I have judged many of these into shows, there seems to be a dirth of "shoot from the hip" watercolors. Where are the artists who aren't afraid to attack their subject with a freehand drawing, to get muddy in the arena of execution and struggle on the edge of their abilities, and aren't afraid to show a change in direction of drawing , value, or color, leaving a smudged, muddy spot as a reminder of the fight? I don't think we should be ashamed if our paintings show a changed course in thinking, or a redrawn edge over a poorly constructed one. I think its time we celebrated a little more freely that we are humans and our watercolors can reflect a little more of our humanness. Several years ago I had the pleasure of enjoying an Andrew Wyeth exhibit in Maine. As much as he is revered for his careful execution of detail, upon closer examination I could see where he chose to change directions at times. I could see where he gouged, scraped, smudged, applied opaque paint, and nearly wore out his paper in his honest attempts to get to the heart of his subject. No fear. And he wasn't afraid to show it. I found that the paintings did not suffer for it. If anything, they became more real, as if I could get closer to the thinking of Mr. Wyeth. In a similar vein, I have seen this in another great master's work: Peter Paul Rubens at the Uffizi Gallery in Florence, Italy. Four large paintings adorn a ballroom, one on each wall. I would guess the paintings were approximately 10-12 feet by 40-50 feet in image size. Upon close examination, I could see that portions within several of the paintings were not executed with the same degree of skill. Certainly a coffee table book would not reveal occasional shortcomings in the execution of several faces, limbs of the body, and horse anatomy. Understandably, these inferior portions of the paintings could have been done by a less skilled hand than the master's, but the point is, Rubens left the areas of obvious reworking and unfinished struggles alone. In the above two examples, I feel that the artists felt quite comfortable with their paintings, even though they showed struggles and inconsistencies, as long as they held up well in totality, and that the message was sufficiently stated. I've noticed the humanness in other masters: certainly some of the Impressionists fall into this category. All of these artists reflect an attitude that I would like to see more of: that of an artist on the edge of his or her abilities with a focused energy on the visual message, not afraid of showing the bumps in the journey, over refinement of technique. I think we can celebrate a little more humanness in our paintings. |
||
|
P.O. Box 1114
2607 Bay Avenue Ocean Park, WA 98640 360.665.5976 info@ericwiegardt.com privacy / © / credits Please report technical issues to our webmaster. Thank you. |
|||