Luck shouldn't play such a big role.
 

Well, it seems I agree with everybody on this thread. Like Marvin and Sharon, the benefit of being taught by a master is beyond compare. My teacher, John Murray (same as Marvin's) was the best thing to happen to me since being born. There were six-hour workshops on Saturday, 3-hour ones on Monday night, and sometimes I traveled to his private school in Long Island after work. Students came from as far away as Reading, PA, Philadelphia, PA, from all around New Jersey, from upstate New York, even from as far away as Troy (a suburb of Albany). So, for those with a will, there was a way.

Meanwhile, I must remember how serendipitous it was that I encountered this teacher at all. He was on a panel of faculty in the School of Visual Arts Illustration department making their presentations at a "career night." He explained his philosophy, showed slides of his students' work, insisted that one semester of a class would not be enough to turn anybody into an able painter. On the basis of that presentation I picked his class to enroll in, and continued doing so happily for the next 11 years. If I had gone to that career night a couple of years earlier, or one year later, he wouldn't have been on the panel and I may not have ever discovered him.

There is something tragic, if not criminal, that aspiring artists have to pick through so much chaff to locate a grain of wheat, when it comes to finding instruction. Whether it's at a workshop or at a local college, you pays your money and takes your chance. I, too, took many art classes before encountering my teacher. They were usually pleasant, but I felt that I was going to have to grope for insights, rely on happy accidents, "copy nature" and hope for the best for the duration of my art career. So, I programmed computers, instead.

There is an excellent book - I think lots of you already know about it - by R.H. Ives Gammell, The Twilight of Painting. (Moderator's note: this book is currently out of print.)

He excoriates the modern art movement for leaving students of painting bereft of decent and consistent instruction. My teacher used to say that all artists before the modern period spoke the same language. Van Dyck could go to Italy and talk about an imprimatura, and it would be an imprimatura, and everybody saw the same thing in his mind's eye. Hue is hue, value is value, and so on. Between the first world war and now, the art "establishment" undertook to blow this body of knowledge into smithereens. Only the mavericks, usually illustrators, acquired this old knowledge and passed it on. It would be the lucky ones who would stumble onto this or that rare maverick.

Now classical realism is enjoying a come-back, and it is palpable how much people are aching for instruction that isn't all that easy to find. Individual artists or students of art shouldn't be to blame. In fact, the task of locating capable instructors should be undertaken collectively. Marvin's got his hand up; I've taken some classes from him, and he's good. So, there's somebody in New York. Now, what about Iowa, Texas, West Texas, Louisiana, Arizona, where I see people on this forum posting from?

I could see where the portrait societies (ASOPA, PSOA) could undertake to vet instructors. Members of distinction, who were students of Gammell or students of Reilley or who have comparable credentials could begin to review the teaching methodology and work of candidates, issuing a seal of approval to the successful ones. Then, students who really want to learn to draw and paint, but don't want to wander in the wilderness for a couple decades, could look for an ASOPA- or PSOA- accredited instructor.

After a few iterations, we could even, possibly, end up with a decent craft guild, or an association or two with teeth, or clout, or whatever. And then, when someone on the forum critiques with 'you need to master some basics, first' it won't sound like the kiss of death.

I think this thread has twisted and turned, but it all has been very interesting to read.

A question I was interested in asking the

On the question of styles: Beth, if someone on the forum posted a piece like any of the four you showed above, for a critique, they would be showered with praise, even though some of us may not like their particular style. (I'm not a fan of Bouguereau's over-sentimentality though his technique is awe inspiring.)

The technical mastery shown in these works is what we critique for, not "style."

Dang Michele, you figured out they were not mine? :)

I was just asking if "style" has any influence on some critiques.

I

Thanks, Catherine. A cup of hot chocolate served at The Adrenalin Bar.

If, as most seem to have agreed in principle from the start, this Forum (nor any other) is not a substitute for intensive, long-term, hands-on, one-on-one studio instruction from an accomplished master, then it is at the very least instructive in apprising the serious student of the value of seeking out such training, if the goal is to work at a professional level of success. Anyone who doesn

Too touchy feely for me!
 

The last time so many people agreed with me was.....I can't remember! Now I know how Sally Fields must have felt.

The fact that people like Sharon and Bill do agree with me goes to show that the choice to be a realistic artist is a life long journey, a long and winding road, and having someone to guide you along part of the path can help you avoid some unnecessary detours.

Steven, I too used to love to play guitar. I couldn't be a slave to two masters so I gave up playing but I love to listen to solo finger style guitar greats while I paint. For me the best of all possible worlds.

I think my work here is through, but before I head back to the dark side I just wanted to address a point raised by you Elizabeth. I'm glad you've chosen to be in the Greensboro workshop. My goal is to make it a week to remember.

Although certain teachers may try to impart a singularity of style upon their students, I am not one of them. I don't teach "style." I teach a broad based approach to painting that seeks to clarify the choices each artist has at their disposal. The goal is not to paint like me or Bouguereau or even Pino (that's his first name by the way) who was an illustrator for many years and who I know personally. Your goal should be to paint like the best possible Elizabeth Schott.

One thing is for sure. I don't think the world is ready for another Marvin Mattelson. I think Sharon would agree with me on that point as well.

On our own nickel!
 

Peter,

On a previous post I descibed one of the numerous critiques Marvin gave without hope of remuneration or mentioning a workshop.

Often the student looks like the teacher until he has the confidence to fly alone.

My teacher said that style is simply your limitation, you have to learn the rules to break them.

One of the members on this forum is interested in working in a more contemporary style, I applaud him. However this is no reason not to do the heavy lifting at the outset. The artist he admires is Euan Uglow, a tres modern British artist. The man is a consummate draftsman and has a very original and beautiful style. He takes as long as a year to complete a painting. He was thoroughly schooled in the classical techniques.

I taught at the Rhode Island School of Design for three years. There is no way I would send a sensitive gifted child there. It was one of the most depressing experiences I have ever had. One graduate project was sardines enclosed in glassine bags suspended from a ceiling.

None of the teachers there are major artists, but poseurs hanging on to their feifdoms. It attracts the lazy and monied from all over the world. I could go on. Classical painting techniques are frowned upon as so hopelessly out of date. The student drawings, yeech!

Marvin must be getting nervous now, but I'm sure we'll ramp it up in the future.

Sincerely,

An Old Buddhist Saying
 

"When the student is ready, the teacher appears."

[QUOTE]Even with the resurgence of interest in classical training, it has to be somewhat bewildering for the student in search of that training to find it. We so often read professionals

Old Irish saying:
 

"While the students are waiting, the teachers won't come out of the coffee shop!"

No one argues that attending a workshop of a master whose style one admires offers the best learning. But aren

Enzie,

A good question. I think that is a question we all have to think about. I really don't have a good answer.

Sincerely,

Cast your fate to the wind
 

Enzie, my point was not that members shouldn't post or ask for advice. I think that is fine and can be quite profitable for both the giver and receiver. I just think that some may think this is a reasonable substitute for an art education.

When I offer a critique it is for someone who can profit from the advice I give. There is no point on me offering subtle advice to someone who has no idea about drawing or form development. So in the spirit of helping the greatest number of people my advice was to study with someone who has great knowledge.

Many times when good advice is given people don't accept it because it isn't what they anticipated as an answer. You have a preconceived notion of how you want the forum to be run. I'm telling you, in my opinion your concept is an inefficient use of time and energy for those who are truly serious about learning the art of portraiture.

I agree it isn't always about money. It's about time and/or the other complications of life. There are always barriers to what we want in life. God's sense of humor, I think. Sharon and I have both shared the sacrifices we each had to make to get to where we are today (sitting at a computer picking away with 2 fingers?).

If you want something you have to give up something. No one can have it the way they want 100% of the time.

If you want to know how to start, buy a cast, set it up under a single light source, set a drawing board next to it, mark a spot on the floor where you make all your observations from and draw the cast in charcoal the same exact size it appears from your observation spot. Work on the drawing, as long as it takes, until it is as close as possible in both the shapes and the tonality as you can get it. When you are done start over again. Do this for two years every day for eight hours. This is how artists were trained in the past.

I am not trying to be funny. This will allow you to conquer drawing and value, the two biggest flaws in everyone's work. If you had a master to check on you every several days and point out the problems it would probably go faster. Watching a step by step demo on the forum will not help anyone develop the skills necessary to be a good portrait artist.

If you were to come to one of my workshops and watch me demonstrate and explain how I draw accurately and how I build form stroke by stroke then the cast drawing would go very much faster.

That's my answer!

Enzie, I think there must be quite a few folks spinning around in the wake of this thread and sharing your concerns and frustration, perhaps thinking,

I am not quite sure how my comments gave the impression that I am the one looking to the forum for tutorials to further my own work. If you have not noticed, I have not posted for critique since at least December, since I felt I need to address certain issues in my work, before taking up someone else

I meant to be agreeing with you, Enzie. My apologies if I didn't articulate that well.

(And I, too, am outta here.)

Nature vs. Nurture
 

It has been some time since I posted on anything that might get me in trouble so what the heck. I think I will throw my hat into the ring here.

I have always had a firm belief that the thing that truly separates the really good artist from those that are simply also-rans or life long students is god given talent.

Sure, skills can be honed and improved and how to handle your paint and brush can be taught. But real artistic talent you either have or don't have. There are many who would like to be an artist and just as many who think they have what it takes to be a singer (as anyone who watched any of the early American idol shows can attest to). Some simply don't have it.

Marvin, Sharon and Bill, although you all worked hard at your craft and to improve on the basic skill you were born with, I truly feel that you do have a skill that can not be taught. Marvin, the students you teach all have some level of natural ability.

I have seen artists that were completely self taught and they may not have the painting skills yet or honed their composition skills but their natural ability shows. And I have seen far too many art school graduates (including some that had received the same training as myself) that, like the American Idol hopefuls, just should just give up on any hopes of a career in art. Or at least not as a realist painter. There is no accounting for what can pass as art sometimes.

Now this next part may not go over well with some. I often refrain from posting critiques because often I feel if the poster can't see what is wrong with their painting nothing I could say will help them.

Just as Simon on American idol asks "Do you actual hear yourself and think you sound good?" Many times I feel like asking the artist (and I use the term loosely) "Did you actually look at your work and think it was good?" Now you can imagine that such a post would not go over very well nor would it be of much help to the posting artist. Also I do not post asking for critiques because all I need do is look at my work and I can tell if it works or not or if it measures up to what I am striving for.

Difference in styles aside, if you cannot compare your work with others' and see that you just do not measure up or that a particular piece of work is not up to snuff then how can anything I might tell you on a forum help?

A realistic painter must be able to see. For many I feel the problem is that seeing is beyond them, just as carrying a tune is beyond the tone deaf. The reason the structure and proportions are off is because they can't see. And I truly feel that many, no matter how much they study and practice, will ever get it. If you don't have it you just don't have it.

I know the debate of nature vs. nurture has been thrashed about plenty. But so far I have not been convinced that those truly great achievers were not the people who found their true calling in life. There is a huge difference between simply competent and those that standout. And I am not telling anyone they should give up painting no more than I would say you can't sing along with the radio for fun but just be realistic about the level of artistic skill you have.

Many who have this gift claim they are no different than anyone else. They just worked harder or had great instruction. To that I say oh poo! Stop being modest and think of those who studied along side of you who failed (or did not achieve the same level of skill) in spite of the same instruction and amount of effort.

You have it or you don't. So, is this a forum for those interested in painting for fun or pursuing a career as an artist? If it is the latter then those who post should expect to be judged by that standard and not expect to be condoled.

If you want someone to say "it's nice" ask your mother.

Clarification
 

Enzie- I was not speaking to you personally but to the plural you (as in all you out there). If I offended you I am sorry. I can appreciate the time it takes to put together a portrait chapter. I recently had the opportunity to participate in Atlanta and Connecticut. I have great admiration for both organizations and the selfless artists who run them.

There is that old axiom of teaching a man to farm vs giving him food. I believe that the type of feedback that the forum can provide is like the food whereas proper training will enable the artist be self sustaining.

I think the forum, a place to exchange ideas, is very efficient as it is. Where else could we be having such a spirited discussion as this?

Michael- I agree that God given talent is a huge factor. However some people need help to get in touch with it.

I had a student a number of years ago in my illustration class at SVA. My students bring in their work the second class so I can see where they're at and what they need to do to get better. One student refused to show me any work because he felt his work was embarrassingly bad. He was the hardest working student I've ever had. By the time he graduated he was doing extraordinarily beautiful work and was hired by Disney as a background painter and is now an animator for them. Before he graduated he showed me his original work he had refused to bring in. It was horrible, there was no evidence of any talent whatsoever. What had his teachers been doing during his first two years at school?

I actually see a greater correlation between those who work hard and success than those with talent alone.

Rudolf Nureyev didn't even see a ballet until he was 19.

God given talent can be hidden deeply and good teaching can bring it to light. Training and talent is the key.

Well gentlemen, the English language seems to have thrown me a curve ball. If I misunderstood the meaning behind your words, my apologies go out to you.

Enzie, you wrote: The approval process was only implemented a few months ago.

Marvin wrote, I recall hearing a writer lecturing on his craft. He used the following as his motto for students of writing. It applies well to anything, but is very apt for artists. He said,

talent + industry = a king
no talent + industry = a prince
talent + no industry = a pauper

In my own teaching I have seen marginally talented students work hard to overcome their natural shortcomings. They may never become the artists who define their generation, but they are producing significant work. I have also seen very talented students content to coast on their natural abilities. More often than not, they eventually gave up and went to other endeavors. Like anything else of value, excellence in art requires a great deal of work.

I haven't posted here for some time - who was alluded to in an earlier post in this thread as being from West Texas? Maybe we're neighbors.

Kirk

Nice color
 

Cathy, I was just looking at your website. Nice color and brushwork! Morgan (that's his first name) too, was an illustrator. Both guys had lots of experience painting lots of things and their work is more expressive and loose than the other two that Beth posted. Kind of interesting. I guess experience is like knowledge - it won't lessen your work.

Michael, I love 'ya but I've got to disagree. I believe that most of what is identified as God-given talent is, at most, just a pre-disposition to look at things and try your hand, or some small grain of eye/hand coordination. Two percent of artistic achievement, maybe.

There's a kid across the street who's a pretty good basketball player. He's crashing the backboard every day, rain or shine, for hours--sometimes well after dark. If he drew and painted as much, he'd put us all to shame.

Finally, there's just no substitute for hard effort--the other 98 percent. It's still fun, but it's hard.

Got to agree with Tom.

Talent is the fuel that keeps the fires of discipline burning and makes you willing to do the hard work.

I'm with Tom on the 2% notion. Michael Jordan has missed more than 13,000 free throws.

It's all about refusing to accept failures, while being willing to undertake thousands of them, and gladly.

Schmid
 

King Richard said it nicely in Alla Prima: "Talent is something people assign to artists only after they exhibit ability," or something close to that.

I've seen several artists that had no ability slowly hammer away at painting like Bill Murray in Ground Hog's Day (at the piano) until they become skilled.

Interesting conversation in this "Critique/anger" thread.

I don't know. Everyone has the stuff they have to work with. Talent, drive, money, circumstance.... I've had my fill of guys telling me that I should wait until my kids are grown, or I already blew it because I didn't get started until I was in my thirties. I haven't been to Art Students League or studied four years at an atelier.

Who's to say that the only resource an artist has in the world is the SOG Forum? It's not a bad source of inspiration and advice, and all I can promise to the universe is make a fellow artist's day a little brighter.

We are separating the "been there, done that, bought the T-shirt" group from the novices, who are maybe 55, with a sick husband and a divorced daughter with three kids living with them, a mortgage and a job they hate, and without the resources to take a workshop.

Those that have the kind of time and drive to get the training necessary will do it anyway. Those who don't or can't don't need to be made to feel that the train has left, so what's the point. It denigrates everything we are doing on the site.

It depresses me to read this thread. It's not about the thrill of creation, or the joy of small victories, or even the pat on the back for getting into the game. It's all about the long hard slog to get the information. No one seems to be having any fun.

I paint because I love it. I love how it makes my clients feel, I love how it touches some of the people who view the work. I've studied for years to gain the technical information I have, but I've put in the time because I enjoy it. And even when I was not that technically proficient, I still loved to paint and draw. That's why we are all here.

I am pleased as punch when I see Beth doing a solid three value painting. Or when
Will Enns works out the bugs to do his husband and wife composition. Watching Alicia struggle through three photo sessions before she finally comes up with the perfect photo of that sweet little girl, and then watching as she shares the completion of the portrait. Jeanine and Dedalier inviting us into their studios to share the frustrations and exhilaration of creation with them. This is not chopped liver. I refuse to believe that tremendous work is not being accomplished on this site.

The SOG Forum is a civilized, caring, professional and educational community of portrait artists. We have each others backs. I will continue to participate and contribute as much as time allows, and to share in the joys and frustrations of our members as we trek along on this journey.

John Sanden said that painting portraits is the Mount Everest of the art world. We might not all get to the top of this mountain, but we are all supporting each other on the climb up.

Peggy

A tough act to follow!

I feel the need to respond in some way to this thread because of my drive and determination to become a skilled and exceptional portrait artist. Words, talent, and hope alone will not do it. Painting alone in my studio day after day will not do it. I'm in a college town with an art school I actually graduated from. NO portrait classes, or anything else for that matter available to me since I've "graduated". No portrait classes were ever available - surprise, surprise (as Gomer used to say).

When I want to do something - I have always found a way to do it. I decided to gear up my first love - painting the figure and learn to be a true portrait artist - a year and a half ago. I had been seriously painting landscape and still life, showing and in galleries for 13 years. My background is in Commercial Art.

Stop reading now if you're not interested in hearing my story of my teachers.

I sought out a fine teacher. Artist magazines, books and the internet were the tools which helped me find the best teacher I could find offering a class during the time I could study. I wanted more than a week, of course, but I knew I would soak up everything I could in the course of a week with a Master of painting. I couldn't spare more than a week. I chose Peggy Baumgaertner and travelled to Wisconsin to spend a week of sheer bliss watching and learning everything she had to offer. She taught me to begin and my paintings absolutely lept from stage one to stage 5 (well, sorta) when I returned. I had a confidence in myself as actually having the background and tools to succeed in the portrait world I didn't have before I went. I also feel like I made a lifelong friend with Peggy and her family. The people in the workshop are also special to me now. We have not kept in good touch but we shared our love of painting and style differences, etc. while together. Also, a lot of hiking after class and eating!

During this year since then - I knew I wanted to study with more portrait artists - since I'm the sponge that I am and never learning enough - and after much research and observation, was sure that Marvin Mattelson was the one person I wanted to study with.

Hope was lost though when I hinted online at this great forum at studying with him in New York. I found out that I would have to become a millionaire and move to a loft apartment in NYC and quit my job and spend a few months there in order to attend regular classes with him. This was no surprise. No, he wasn't teaching any workshops anytime soon near North Carolina either (ha). I didn't give up. I knew I needed to watch him paint. I knew that I had to raise the money somehow to watch him paint somewhere!

"When the student is ready, the teacher appears."

This really did happen! Renee Price, another portrait artist on the forum, and I talked a little offline about our posts on this forum, our same state status, etc. She had mentioned in the forum that she was searching for a teacher to come to her area to teach a possible workshop. I told her I thought it would be great if Marvin would even consider it. She was also very very interested in studying with him.

After Renee and I did a little research on site possilities I wrote to Marvin bravely asking him to come to NC for a week long workshop. We talked 3 way the next weekend for around 2 hours! We all decided it was a great idea. As for Marvin Mattelson being a fuddy duddy - fahget it - he is so "real" and personable and dry humored - and, well, that's enough of that.

Renee and I knew we would have to financially back this endeavor whether we got students or not. It was a big, exciting step. We were getting a lifelong learning experience as serious portrait artists. Choosing a professional like Marvin, whom we knew would "deliver" was an important decision on our part. We would never want someone who couldn't teach (hey, I'm a teacher so I can say that!). There are many people out there teaching workshops who really are not good teachers. It was important to both of us to make sure we didn't make that mistake. Much planning and arranging has taken place and will continue to take place until the workshop is actually over but we are all enjoying planning it and want it to be a great experience day and night for all participants. It's a little scary - but nothing Renee and I can't accomplish.

If you are going to save money, and can only take one workshop a year (which is my budget for sure!) then you must pick carefully. This forum has proven to me that it is very useful and I have stated it in many different categories within the forum. I have posted one in progress portrait for critique and will post more often as soon as my broken finger starts to heal enough for me to paint again (sad but true right now). The most useful thing about it for me has been the ability to choose my teachers to study with 'LIVE'! If they both had not been members of the SOG site and not had sites linked to this one I may never have seen their beautiful work.

So many resources here - but I found my inspirations here as well and actually managed to watch the masters paint in person. Nothing can take the place of the live model or the live teacher.

I am so excited about this summer, and so is Renee. So are you if you have found a way to learn from a master teacher. Save up - its worth it!

Sincerely,

What to do?
 

Denise, Peggy, Karin,

As I have contributed to the thread I hope I have not been mean-spirited. I think you have rather proved the point that you have been willing to go the exta mile, find instruction, take risks, work your butt off, listen to your inner voice.

I have been an artist in one way or another my entire life. I think some of us on this forum have given the impression that the way to have success in the portrait world is to take pictures and then keep copying them until we are better picture copiers.

I do not think we have emphasized the tremendous amount of preparatory work that has to be done before you even begin to use color. I think when you point out the proper steps to people things become easier for them, and their efforts less frustating.

I think there has to be a dose of reality here. The web is loaded with portrait sites. The web is also where many people get their ideas of what portraiture is. To many people it looks like just rendering photos successfully is what it is about.

I think we have to take what we do here seriously. We are experimenting with a new form of communication and people's lives.

I love communicating about art and helping people. I do think we have to seriously encourage people to do the initial hard work.

My path was very serendipitous. My first teacher was a master draftsman. We did figure drawing every week. The main thing he encouraged was originality, honesty and a strong point of view.
We did cast drawings in plastic, worked from double exposures, made Maroger, used combinations of media that would probably blow up Iraq.

I taught myself portraiture, with tapes and a lot of hard work. But I did have the basics. I had been a fashion illustrator, so there is not a fabric I cannot render. I know from being in many fields, just how difficult and unforgiving the art world is is.

I do not think that a totally classic atelier approach is for everybody. As a matter of fact I find a lot of it stifling.

I think we have to make room, somehow here, for the aspiring pro and the interested amateur.

I think we can go on helping people, but we have to keep in mind what an awesome responsibility it is.

Sincerely,

Michael was honest. One can learn a language better than someone else, another has a musical ability others do not have. And so it is with the ability to draw and paint people.

Peter

My final thought
 

Thank you Karin for starting this thread. I think there has been so much heartfelt input here.

As I read the whole thing, it boils down to one simple statement for me:

I am thinking about portrait art in a much different way than I did before I came here.

It has raised the bar on what I consider acceptable in myself. The critiques certainly play a big part in this, but it is visiting all the artists web sites, reading the tool section, watching Peggy's videos, memorizing Chris Saper's book (which she'll have to autograph for me in April, if she can find a page that hasn

Fun, fun, fun
 

Who ever said it wasn't fun? We just said it was hard. That's what makes it so much fun. Each little step forward brings so much satisfaction. If everything came easily, then everything would become old very quickly. The fact that you can continue to get better and grow, no matter what your level is, makes this a never ending source of joy. Yin and Yang; pain and pleasure; up and down. If everyone would learn to paint the world would be a much better place.

Painting gives you the opportunity to create a (very) small piece of the universe exactly the way you want it. You become God-like in the mini-universe of your painting (as long as the client agrees). On the other hand, when it really flows you are not even there. Painting is meditation at the highest level.

Am I always happy when I paint? No, I'm not Alfred E. Neuman! Sometimes I want to pull my hair out (see photo), but I always prevail in the end because it's something I need to do to satisfy my soul. It's certainly better than starting wars!

My two cents...please.
 

I am a part-time portrait artist. I have been pursuing portraits for over six years. I work with other artists in the area to continue the learning process of light/shadow, values, and especially likeness. Each of us points out to each other what they see or what they think the piece needs.

Here we do the same thing...and with much more experienced artists. What a field of treasures! On some of my early pieces Steve Sweeney critiqued what I thought were my very best works. He picked through them and nice as he is, it was still hard for me to take (if I can find the file I'll post it soon). However, and no matter how nit picky I thought it was (axis of the base of the nose not aligned with chin and forehead), I look at that piece today and see every minute detail he presented. My following works have none of those and by great measure are far superior works than that one.

My theory: if those who are offended will just leave, we'll have only those here who are willing to learn. If you just want to draw and have fun, get some of your family to tell you how it looks. If you want to paint portraits, then it is a highly technical field and life-long pursuit and is had by many professionals who started just as we are.

My passionate thanks to all here who are willing to take time out of their professional careers to help a struggling artist like myself to better himself and someday take the stage and awards along beside them.

Art and Religion
 

Marvin,

You and I do agree on some major points, proper foundations and really learning your craft. While I do think the best approach is to find an inspiring mentor, I was reminded of Rousseau who was self taught. A lot of what I see in the present classical and realism movement is, in my opinion, rather dull and derivative.

I have taken exception to your self promotion of your workshops.

I do think a student should be inspired by a particular style or artist and seek him or her out. I know you have been asked to do so, so have many of us. Art, I think is somewhat like religion. I am always suspicious of churches that advertise and proselytize.

Mentioning them, in my opinion, when offering a critique or an opinion defeats the purpose of this forum and makes it look like a sales tool for workshops.

Sincerely,

The honeymoon's over?
 

Oh Sharon,

I knew deep in my heart it couldn't last.

Yes we agree on many points. I too agree that much of the academic work one sees is lifeless. I think that type of training covers an important part of the equation but it's not the whole enchilada. There is the other side of the coin, the expressive side. Too much of either is not good.

In terms of the self promotion thing I respectfully choose to disagree with you. If you notice to left of the posts, at the top left side of each page are little banner ads promoting various products of SOG artists some of whom are also critiquing here on the forum. Since I am primarily a painter and am not willing to spend the time to do a video (Coming soon - Marvin Mattelson the Movie) or write a book due to the time commitment, I have no banner over there.

Furthermore, the forum itself is a promotional tool for SOG. They each give each other credibility (not to mention web presence). The forum is still a valuable tool, nonetheless.

I have been teaching for over 30 years. I never considered doing workshops until last summer when one of my students asked if I could recommend one she could take on her vacation. My past experience has been whenever one of my students went to study somewhere else they got "screwed" up, so I said if it was ok with SVA, I would lead one. So I did.

The participants had a great time and learned a lot. Many said it was the best workshop (thanks Mom) they had ever attended and so when Renee and Denise approached me I thought it would good for me to "go south" at their invitation. So I am. Our advertising budget is word of mouth. My mouth.

If I offer it to people or just recommend the general concept of taking a workshop it's because I feel it will genuinely help them.

So in addition to helping people here I help promote myself as well, for what I believe is their greater good. At least I am upfront about it. I'm sure I could ask people I know to write in and praise me (untold thousands stand waiting, just kidding) I see that all the time here on the forum. Is there a difference? I feel comfortable doing so because in the end I know that whatever it takes to get people to come, I CAN HELP THEM!!

Since you live in Boston I would invite you to come to my workshop in Greenwich Connecticut and see for yourself, May 27 to 30, 2003, but I wouldn't want to offend you. People have the choice. If they see my sparkling smile they can choose to skip my posts if I offend them, or they can read my words, if interested, look at the work both my students and I have done, and choose one way or the other.

I think life is just too short to stand around and wait for things come to you. Look around. Do good things really come to those who wait? So what if on occasion, I choose to reach out and take the bull by the horns. Gotta get back to my easel, the commercial's over.

One last thing, I jokingly tell my students that we are all members of the Church of Academic Realism since painting IS my religion.

Still friends?

Marvin, you are Impossible!
 

Only if I don't get my diamond!

Coming soon
 

It's in the mail.

Lows and Highs
 

This topic began about people becoming angry because of a critique they received. What about the paintings that are never critiqued? I have noticed several artists posting work (both excellent and beginner) and practically begging for a critique, even moving their paintings in the hopes that someone will say something. If nothing else, I am honest. I have to admit that I was bothered that my most recent painting had not been critiqued, so when I read this thread about offending people in a critique, I was compelled to bring up this other side. I would much rather have someone tell me to throw out my brushes and find a government job, than to be ignored. I've kind of been told that, and I'm still here! A person has to be willing to work, able to take criticism, and make your own opportunities.

Which brings up another note. Sometimes we all have to take the bull by the horns and go after what we want. I had learned a lot from the forum, and was ready for the next step. "When the student is ready, the teacher will come." Denise told our story so well, that there is nothing I could say to improve on it. We both had a need, we both had a vision, and when she said the name Marvin Mattelson, I just about jumped out of my chair. The workshop has taken off and has been nothing but fun. Marvin is a blast and I think Denise and I are long lost sisters!

Final thoughts that are just my opinions: harsh critiques are better than none, and be driven to be the best you can be(and prove your critics wrong!) Watch out for us in July! The future's so bright we gotta wear shades! :cool:

Renee Price

Shameless promotion: Marvin Mattelson Portrait in Oil June 20-24, 2003 Greensboro, NC

Moderator's note: this and the next several posts refer to posts that have since been deleted.


First, let me remind everyone of the rules of engagement on this forum - please refrain from personal attacks. This thread is well on its way to tearing itself asunder without any additional push. :)


Regardless of your position or personality, we are all here and for our own individual reasons we all keep coming back to this forum. So, while we are all here together, we should do our best to help one another not tear others down.

So I encourage everyone (including me) to get out into the topics and help where you can! Promote yourself if that is your desire - God knows that if we don't promote ourselves, no one else will do it for us. But I think that with everything we "receive" from this forum, there comes a responsibility to "give back".

That is what makes us a community. Without it, we are just a bunch of nut artists focused on our own self-interests looking for opportunities to snipe at others - that is not the community we want to build.