Sorry Mike, I didn't mean to keep you waiting for a response so long. I had to get ready for the "home boutique"event and that same evening received out of town guest, who just left this morning.
I totally agree with your remarks about the lay person.
Quote:
|
I think that if you picked ten bright citizen laymen and set before them a series of paintings, drawings, etc., and ask them to pick out the most aesthetically pleasing, for the most part I believe their selections would coincide with what we artists would agree are the paintings that follow our "so called" rules. I do not, however, believe that the lay persons could well articulate the reasons for their choices. They might say -- It just looked good to me.
|
Since we were entertaining we visited the Getty on Monday. I was just amazed at the amount of people who crowded into the room to view Impressionistic paintings versus the amount of people who came to view the William Bougerau exhibit, when his work was on exhibit there.
When the Impressionist first started with their unconventional ways of painting, the traditionalist where the first to shun the new ideas, followed by many art critiques, who had to give there two cents of opinion of what constitutes good art. After much negative hype the tables have turned to such a degree that the Impressionist are better known to the layman then many of the traditional Salon painters.
This supports the argument that other artist are the one's who will be the least likely group to offer support when a fellow artist decides to break the rules and head for something unconventional. Time and exposure to new ideas shapes our opinion of what becomes acceptable in art.
I agree further with you that as an artist we have to follow what feels right to us. I am a traditionalist myself, but every ones in a while I will see something that breaks every rule I try to adhere to, with such great success that I even get impressed.
When the rule breakers have a solid understanding of drawing, color theory and composition, the resulting work can be refreshingly new. For lack of a better comparison, I would compare them to really good drivers who have turned stunt drivers. These people all have the solid background on how to drive, but by trying out new ideas and trial and error they make their vehicles do what they want them to. Of course what we, the casual observer don't see, are the way they have manipulated the engines, tires, chassis, etc. to impress us with their skills. By innovative ideas and by doing things that the majority of us would look at as impossible these few are able to command our attention and respect for what they do.
Artists need to gain solid foundations by learning to draw, understand color theory and composition, etc. Then when the necessary skills are obtained , we should encourage the development of new ideas and new ways of doing things, rather then go on the defensive and try to talk artists out of their new ideas. I admire those who are willing to risk and be true to their ideas. Those who can follow their heart with passion are those lucky ones, who will show us new ways of looking at the world.