One more worry: Is my work too complicated, too subtle? Is it beyond the grasp of most viewers? I see visual connections across wide expanses of canvas and paper. I do not think I am deluding myself. Yesterday's drawing does work well. There is a solid core, there are rhythms and rhymes, there is movement and motion, there is value contrast, there are a large variety of forms, there is light, there is structural integrity. So, why is it not a hit? I believe it does hit well. Then why are viewers not begging that it be put in public venues? What are they not begging to see it up close and personal? Art that speaks truth should be seen. Perhaps Vincent Van Gogh wondered the same.
In yesterday's blog I quoted a New York Times article from March 22, 1992. The following paragraph, from the same article, is relevant to my worries of today: "Cezanne's career might have been as grim as Van Gogh's -- and as short -- had he not been the son of a banker and, ultimately, his heir. As it is, his progress from clumsy Expressionism to a sublime fusion of the monumental and the ethereal has attracted scholars from Roger Fry to Meyer Schapiro and John Rewald." (from the New York Times article, ART; How Cezanne Evokes a Bach Fugue, published March 22, 1992) This is an amazing drawing. It is amazing in its queries, its discoveries, and in its value nuance. But those qualities ain't seen here! I tried for well over 20 minutes to reproduce it accurately, as seen in real light in the real world. I failed, miserably! Giving up, I show it in the manner seen here. I show this drawing along with this cautionary tale: Please realize there is a lesson in life here. Life lived cannot be reproduced accurately. We make films, we produce plays, we write novels, we write poems and essays, i.e. we make art. Art is a reflection of the authenticity that is living. Art is an effort to reproduce the authority that is living. Art fails as accurate reproduction of things experience in form, in emotions, in intellect. Therefore, my failure to reproduce this drawing well is (Failure) X (Failure) = Failure-squared!
I have, throughout my life, been a voracious reader of Mark Twain. Why? I think we share much in our views of life and the characters within our living, i.e. our relationships with men, women, and animals. To mitigate the difficulties, we both find relief in humor. Today I show my newest painting, Adjective, named after a line from Mark Twain's Pudd'nhead Wilson.
The drawing shown today is a massive effort of pencil on paper. Regrettably the extreme nuances of pencil, as seen in actual front of the viewer, cannot be reproduced well. Value variations, from black through all the grays to the white of paper, sing songs only fully appreciated in person. To satisfy fully, this need of personal, actual in-front-of experience, is true in all sophisticated arts, from music to the visual; A lament Mark Twain might relate to when thinking of his personal performances (before audiences) near the end of his life. The distractions in life that help make things work, but don't make me feel emotional satiated, are too many. As examples, there is the slowness of my internet connection and the holes in the side of my truck that need fixing in order for it to pass state inspection. I am dealing with those kinds of mundane things at the same time I am trying to make emotionally satisfying art, Yesterday was more the former, less of the latter. I did make one substantial drawing; I made it fast, it came easily. This drawing sums a few of my recent explorations. It makes sense to me in its play with 3D space, value contrast, form, and ground. More in this manner are coming....
Today I admit to photoshop alteration. For the first time I have done research using the tools of the photo enhancement computer program Photoshop. In the painting, Weoman, I altered the left side because I could see changes a-coming that I had not yet accomplished in the studio. The changes seen here will occur immediately upon my working on this painting. This will happen later today. So, I am not fooling you. I admit, I did work digitally on this painting. The manual work upon it will soon match the changes you see here. It will be slightly different, and much better, than what I was able to accomplish with Photoshop.
Yesterday's drawing continues my complex research into an enhanced sense of value, form, line, and compositional structure. I believe yesterday's drawing is a very good drawing. It is predecessor to great work. My process is undergoing transformation. Process change is leading to image change. The profundity of my work is climbing a hill, moving up, moving toward maximization of my human possibilities; all in a time of superheroes! I had a dream. Its title was Collifocks & Hammers. What??? As mysterious as that is, so am I. Yesterday's drawing is absolutely marvelous. The reproduction here does not represent it well. Remember, I work in pencil on paper; trying to make the grays and whites and the darks (maximum pencil push) reproduce well, is impossible. The true and extreme nuance is simply lost in translation.
The painting Weoman (2018 No.3) is taking a marvelous turn. Marvel it is because I can see it coming; perhaps you cannot. Three-dimensional space is being created, summoned; during its next debate its depth will increase. The bottom left is asking for a plunge forward. It will be solved. Please continue to watch it unravel. Do you see it? There is a quick fix in the painting 2017 No.14. The speckled blue and white rectangular area has been extended, more of it added to the right. I declare this composition solved. Does this mean the painting is finished? No; it will take a few sessions to shore up its details and nuance, e.g. the bottom of the painting was slammed in, thus it varies in value and color. This confusion is seen particularly in the manganese violet portion. I must re-work to insure I am confident the best of all possible solutions is found. At least the best possible solution I am capable of finding at this moment in my knowledge and understanding.
Yesterday's drawing tried something new. I believe it works. The central form casts a shadow, but it is an incorrect shadow, as least as to the reality that such a form would cast. I am talking about the arms the central object has, on its left and right. Those arms create no shadows on the diagonal plank on its left. Instead the shadow resembles an ace of spades symbol. This maneuver, present but false, gives a strong center to the composition. The strength is there because it allows a dark valued "V" to take over the center of the composition. A "V" is like a triangle. Triangles are always strong. We know this to be true in two-dimenional compositions, as well as supports that strengthen bridges and buildings. There is physics in visual compositions too! There are multifarious ends facing me. One has immediacy. The idea of my mortality and eventual silence is the scariest. My here & now involvement in the End of the Year celebrations, and holidays, is the most demanding. I am a social animal, as well as a spiritual/Intellectual/emotional one. I have family. I have myself. Conflicts arise and overwhelm. Particularly at this time of the year, during this particular Ending. The process is not pretty; perhaps the outcome will be. I am trying to make here & now work well for me and for the people in my life, friends and family. I need generous amounts of time in the studio to feel comfortable with myself. Recently that time has been compromised, reduced by the many preparations to celebrate. Hopefully the celebrations will diminish my conflicts. Best I can expect is my memory will be altered by their success. I hope good memories will not make them too ugly to repeat.
Yesterday I made one drawing in one hour. It is informative. I want to pursue the simplicity of its central form. Soon a painting will come that takes this simplicity as most important. Look at the painting 2017 No.13 in reproduction. It is difficult to see it well in this small form. In the studio this painting sings. It is large, a width of 71 inches (180 cm). There are also problems in reproducing color and value. I made a postcard of 2017 No.13; its image looks cramped in a 5x7 inch format. To get attention, for people to wish to explore my art more fully, more correctly, and in person, I have to get their attention. This will be done best if I make a few works that reproduce well in small formats, such as on a 5x7 inch postcard... always nice to have a new goal. State 20 of the painting 2017 No.13 was important. There will be a state 21. Right now this painting is a pinch away from finality. The only thing I question is the mid-portion of the dominant right form. I am wondering if the value of the shadow between the lowest snake-like form and its second-from-bottom portion is too high; should it be darkened? That, along with a few minor purifications, it will be done; will happen today.
Yesterday's drawings are vastly different from one to the next. This happens when I am anticipating transition to a new painting. What shall I do? With what shall I wrestle? A new painting will begin very soon. This morning The New Yorker sent an email to all its subscribers with the cartoon I reproduce below. It is apt in many ways. It relates to our society, but also embraces the constant internal arguments I have. Only I get me, and I don't completely get me. That is the major reason I make art. It is also the reason my work bounces around in search for consistent, relentless truth. Can any human endeavor find absolute truth? I think there are absolute truths, like honesty. However, complex endeavors, like making art, do not easily reveal absolute truth. Thus comes my drawings, one simple, the next complex. There are those that are dominated by lines and those that are dominated by hard core black graphite. Yesterday's drawing exhibits the blackest I can get with that pencil of mine. |
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
|