last evening I attended an informal presentation/art critique. A slide presentation had been put together of pictures produced by four different artists. Each artist was introduced and then we saw a sort of retro-spective of that artists work. We had been given a bio and had an idea of each artists's background and education, and how their work had been accepted within the art community. Some of them had achieved international recognition, some more local. A couple had been recognized, even as students, as potential"movers and shakers". So why? As I looked at the pictures, I realized that each of them had a unique and recognizable style that was out of the ordinary--and none of them produced "pretty pictures". Each of them had a special talent for a certain type of work--one did snow and water like I've never seen it done before. One used a specific blue colour in so many ways and scenes that I was in awe. another produced architectural sketches that were stunning. A third could create a scene with just a couple of brush strokes, and while I didn't particularly like his style, I very much appreciated his skill.
So maybe the answer to acceptance, is in finding that one style that speaks for my vision and can become distinctly mine. A tall order, but already I know that I am most comfortable in small, fussy, detailed work. I enjoy, and am challenged by working in a muted, slightly mono-chromatic colour scheme. I need to work more with, and become more confortable in, the proper use of value. So why do I keep trying to work against my nature and pleasure?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment