My very first impulse in visual art-making was to create interactive forms and figures. At last I am returning to my nativity. These drawings are initiation of my acceptance that interaction is my primary instigation in making Art. This reflects truth in my living. Interactions give me reason to live. I accept this. I will make art called "Interactions."
I am getting better. I better recognize that which says me when I see it. This is mindfulness in action. It is my mind that interests me. I bare what says me and I make better.
Of these two drawings I prefer the one I began on 10/28 (completed yesterday). The other drawing is OK; it looks like I lost my processing edge. When I get tired I tend to look for a solution by use of form, rather than through composition. Compositional solutions are superior when the emotional tug-o-war rests upon the play of negative versus positive space.
"Ghost Town" is in state #7. It is getting better.
This move is a real one. Symbolism is upon me. Is this, definable, decidable, decipherable symbolism? To my inner self, yes! This makes sense to me. This is not verbal sense. This is internal sense. Things are right in this, my newest painting, "Crevice."
Thus it begins. I have accepted an idea true to me. This is about symbolic representation as important to energizing my deepest self. I accept it, my images may mystify some viewers, but no matter how perplexing, puzzling, convoluted, mystifying, and unaccountable it may look to some, this is core me. I must do it. The new painting, "Crevice", is such consequential image.
If you wish to criticize me, please do! Just call me dogged, relentless, a pain in the ass to those who wish simple and easy. Here I am, still at it, imperfect. This drawing is exceptional. Imperfectly a step toward wrapping together emotional balance and imbalance.
The title of today's post is my response to this drawing: I find it scary, ominous, and forceful. More than ever before I am in touch with my personal call/response network. My response to cross-currents presented to me is immediate. These personal call-outs appear before me, within me, as flashes of information; immediately I am able to translate my ongoing emotional responses into visual content. This, I imagine, is not unlike a jazz musician in the middle of improvisation on a musical theme.
Complex versus simple; expression is in the eye of the beholder. I must remember this: The artist is not required to spell out every nuance of every feeling. The artist is required to be simple, pure, accepting of the viewer's profound understanding of life, living, and feeling. In other words, the artist is not required to spell out every nuance of every feeling. No more descriptive quality is necessary If the artist feels, then produces an image that is that feeling. The viewer, through his or her feeling, will complete that which must be felt.
I want my Art to simultaneously contain purity and emotive complexity. Are they mutually exclusive? I believe Mark Rothko, and Ellsworth Kelly, have proved otherwise. And... they are not the only ones.
Negative space is paramount as emotive structure. Positive forms share responsibility; forms must be profoundly, attentively complex, while positioned sparsely within negative space.
Yesterday's drawings continue my research into this dilemma, purity versus emotive complexity.
These drawings are research efforts. They desperately seek universal emotive impact. I seek emotional visual statements, statements not confused by dominant forms. Substantive negative space is required to give positive forms potency by juxtaposition.
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.