Dick Schellen's sent me this photograph. It shows my painting in his London apartment. There it is, over his fireplace. Dick cut down the original painting to a detail (look at the post of 12/22/2010 for the entire painting). Obviously this is a virtual photograph in a virtual apartment. I love it! Dick's background is in graphic design. He was reading my blog and watched this painting load on his screen, line by line, from the top. It stopped loading at the detail shown here. Dick's astute, graphic designer eye, enjoyed the detail, free as it is from too much trivia, and lush in it painterliness.
Yesterday allowed me just over an hour in the studio. I produced one drawing. And again, the limited time produced good results. Urgency of focus has its benefits. Today I will have a good chunk of time in the studio. Plans are to draw and continue finishing work on the painting "Pond." It is snowing again! Already there are four inches of new snow on the ground. Beautiful stuff, but time consuming in the requirement to dig out. I had not returned to "Pond" for three months. This turned out to be a good thing. Working on it yesterday was a delight. All I did was work on the stones, but it went well, and made perfect sense. The paint is fully dry and this allows for new paint to be applied with extreme accuracy. This is exactly what is required to finish it.
A drawing was made prior to my painting on "Pond," and I like it very much. Today I am feeling very good about my work. Yesterday my friend Dick Schellens and I reviewed several drawings made over the past month. The variety of approach surprised even me. Line, form, and perspective are handled in many ways. Some drawings have a cartoonish feel, some are humorous, some with subtle emotions. It appears I change from day to day and my drawings reflect it. This is good. My drawings demonstrate my daily feelings and the current artistic questions I am asking. Today is full of activity outside the studio. I just finished a great effort to dig out from yesterday's snowfall. Later I have appointments. If I get into the studio I will only have time to draw. You know what happened if there is no post tomorrow. As predicted, yesterday I had little energy to make art. I did make one drawing, and I find it an exceptionally interesting one. Its construction is unusual. The figures are approached differently, and the space too. The head of the woman is obviously a physical impossibility, but a touch to the back, and a glance in return, gives the relationship between the two figures a level of response that I feel important. Here it is, enjoy!
It has begun to snow heavily here. I am not looking forward to another day of digging out. Nine inches are predicted during the day, and more over night and into tomorrow morning, stopping at around 5 A.M. This morning found me making preparations for the blast of snow, piling wood near the door, and getting the mail out early. Despite this, look for an interesting post tomorrow. Paintings never make complete sense upon first impulse. The elements are there, but the reason for their existence is not immediately comprehensible. Thus it is with the painting "Window." Today I show version #17 of this painting. My paintings develop on their own time. I must accept the enormous time required to obtain clarity. Vincent van Gogh and Pablo Picasso were much quicker; both often made a painting a day. Many of those paintings were mediocre, but a few were excellent. The best works of van Gogh and Picasso are the most developed, and these excellent works appear to have taken more time than these artists' average paintings. Examples are van Gogh's self portrait in the Fogg Museum (Harvard University) and Picasso's "Guernica." The progress of "Guernica" was recorded in photographs taken by Picasso's mistress Dora Marr, so we know it took more than a month from start to finish. To remind you of these paintings, by van Gogh and Picasso, I show them after my work.
Yesterday, before painting on "Window," I made another study for its reclining nude. Obviously, I must get her right, because she has become so very important to this painting. In yesterday's drawing I was most interested in her arms and how they move out of the torso. The rest of this drawing does not resemble the nude in "Window." The painting "Pond" is back on my work wall. It looks very good. I washed it down and coated it with retouch varnish. I am ready to finish it off, but that will not happen today. In my effort to be aware of my energy and ability to focus, I will not paint today. Last week was a good one; consuming much energy and full of insight. Check in tomorrow to see a drawing or two. I am trying to stay in touch with my creative energy. Yesterday I did not possess the proper focus to continue to paint on "Window." I made a couple of drawings; the second is a study for the reclining nude in "Window." In terms of being a "study," I was most interested in the upper torso and arms, so the final drawing looks quite different than the nude in "Window." Also, a drawing takes on a life of its own. Being a study does not mean it will perfectly adhere to the image in the work being "studied."
I feel a strong need to pull together my "loose ends." Today I will put "Pond" on the painting wall and begin to move it toward completion. It is solved; the work requires refinement. First I'll need to wash it down (remove the studio dust) and place a coat of retouch varnish on it (refresh the colors of the dried paint). I also plan to work a little on the nude in "Window." I can not do much to "Window" today because its paint is wet and slimly. However, I can scrape the paint off the section which bothers me and on that portion apply fresh paint. "Window" requires much more work, but much of it will be to enhance what is already present, so it will have to dry before I enhance. I saw Karole Armitage's new dance work last night, "Three Theories." Its themes revolved around three important theories of Physics: Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, and String Theory. These are vastly different from one another in approach, and their ability to deal with the complexity of our universe. String Theory purports to be a "Theory of Everything." The dancers were wonderful, but the overall experience fell into boredom as its three sections (one for each of the theories) were not much different in movement. There was a repetitiveness; too much of the same. More than anything, this piece spoke to the need for contrast in a work of art. The approach in the studio is changing. Yesterday there were no drawings made. I went right into the painting "Window" and never looked back. "Window" is getting better; it feels more substantial. It is making sense. I will add no more comments today. "Window," at this point, will speak for itself.
Robert Altman's film "Gosford Park" has a cast of many characters, each convincingly wander through this film prone to basic human traits. These proclivities can be identified as the seven deadly sins: lust, greed, sloth, gluttony, anger, narcissism, and envy. Today I show version 15 of the painting "Window." This painting is finally starting to make sense to me. I can feel it coming together, and because of this I have become more dedicated to working on it; I can feel within myself a strong desire to get it right. The relationship between the figures has begun to sing true. This is not a film, and I cannot move the viewer from scene to scene, so I have placed a fantastical nude on the table to imply a major and problematical component in the relationship between the man and the woman. There is obviously lust, which does not fully describe the complexity of this man/woman relationship. Lust is a minor player in one gender's desire to be involved with the other. This is where I need to rip a quote from Vincent van Gogh: "What I want and aim at is confoundedly difficult, and yet I do not think I aim too high." Robert Altman's exhibition of human problems in "Gosford Park" begins in simplification, as characters emanate base human qualities of the seven deadly sins. At the end of the film, the viewer of "Gosford Park" is compelled to comprehend the overwhelming driving force between people is not simplistic traits, such as envy and narcissism. We are driven by a more profound nature, which animates our desire to express, secure, and confirm our very existence. It is my aim to demonstrate our complex human, instinctual, nature. I do not think I aim too high.
My title refers to the reason for my posting late today. I am taking a morning class at a local college on the films of Robert Altman. Today we watched "Gosford Park." I may eventually comment on these films, but today I mention it simply to describe why I posted late. The class is every Thursday, so I will be late posting for the next seven Thursdays. "Gosford Park" is a great film; the most sophisticated mystery I have every seen. Its complexity gives it tremendous value, but it is its profundity which makes it great. I will return to this tomorrow because it does relate to my work. But today I want to show you yesterday's work and then go immediately to the studio. I am only going to eke out about two hours of art-making today. Also, it snowed last night. I need to shovel snow and finish the cleanup.
Robert Altman made a visually beautiful film in "Gosford Park." My painting "Window" is in an ugly phase while I work out the details of the figures. Yesterday I did more work on the reclining nude, and much more work is still required. The drawing from yesterday continued my striving to go straight at emotive sensibility. That's all for now; I need to go and work. Working when space, time, and energy is present is not an untested idea. W. Somerset Maugham is said to have limited himself to 4 hours a day of writing because he found going beyond 4 hours produced nothing of value. Making art is not altogether identical to writing, since making art requires much physical effort and consummate hand-eye coordination. In any case, as I mature and move out of my informative years, and into my years of self-expression, I am beginning to understand the limitation of one's daily creative energy. A student must acquire immense knowledge quickly, and the only way to do this is to slavishly practice. Acquisition of basic knowledge is no longer of the highest concern to me. It is time for me to be expressive, and not work in order "to practice." To quote Maugham: "Every production of an artist should be the expression of an adventure of his soul." This works for me. When making art it is important for me to stay in tune with my energy. I must stop making art when it becomes mere practice, rather than expression. This insight may seem trite to you, but it is very important to me, the dedicated worker who has lived a life of excessive work. Excess in work does not jive with expression. Expression requires one to be totally awake, and wakefulness is only available if one is in peak energy, as concentrated focus requires. Yesterday I spent only two hours in the studio. In this limited time my focus was strong and I made a drawing of insightful expression. If you have read my blog for a long time you know I am fond of quoting those who influence me. W. Somerset Maugham said, "The ability to quote is a serviceable substitute for wit."
The painting "Window" took a nice jump. In yesterday's post I addressed my desire to relentlessly move toward excellence, which I admitted, at this point in my development, to being a bogus concept. I know what I know, and I need to use this to express and discover. Centering my activities around acceptance of my knowledge will lead to new and deeper knowledge. However, as today's title alludes, one must be careful, one must be critical. For instance, when I made the reclining nude's left foot I was very happy with it, rising as it does above the table, creating space around it, and in front of it. I was happy with the form of this foot as well. Unfortunately I placed the foot on her leg in reverse anatomy. When this woman stands up her big toe will be on the outside of her foot! Today I will make it right. The moral? When one paints from an intuitive acceptance of knowledge the results will mostly hold truth, but watch out for simple mistakes. If I had not pointed out the backwardness of her foot would you have seen it? So does it matter? In Picasso's work I have seen several examples of the same problem, including a well known print from the Vollard Suite. I show you this image of Picasso's below the image of "Window" (in this Picasso print the reclining nude's foot, which rests in the bottom right corner, has its big toe on the wrong side, and her heel on this foot is also strange). Obviously Picasso did not worry about anatomical correctness. In general I do not, but the backwards foot in "Window" is easy to correct, and it bothers me; I will fix it. My plans for today include an initial drawing, and then right back into painting on "Window."
|
To read my profile go to MEHRBACH.com.
At MEHRBACH.com you may view many of my paintings and drawings, past and present, and see details about my life and work. Archives
April 2024
|