What makes him/her a true artist?

[Mischa Milosevic]

It is but a few that see the big picture and will with all humility truthfully admit what they see.

It is but a few that have true knowledge and true humility to be honest and usher the words the king is naked. Flaunting ones mediocrity and selling it as mastery is a out rite lye. Still, many buy into the lye for lack of knowledge and mediocrity, while deceiving others, buys into the self same lye.

The grate artists of the past and of today are rarely noticed and in many instances ridiculed. It is bat a few that have exhibited true mastery even as a youth and went on to forge a path of excellence. Then you have the artists that start out late in life. Even though late, they are not discouraged by the lack of time, they strive for excellence and create some wonderful works of art.

In my humble opinion, the art of the masters, past and present, has been pushed aside by mediocrity and psychopathy. It is quite evident that the market dictates what true art is and this is plane to see throughout history and today.

It is rare, even when looking back in history, that we find true comities of talented, learned, dedicated artists that humbly direct, educate and do their best to preserve true excellence in art.

What is true art?

When faced with this question, many will and are quick to give their definition. They feel it is an attack of their intellect and they automatically must respond. Others wait for someone else to respond first but are ready to point out errors even before the answer is given. Then you have the silent type.

It is on a rare occasion that you will hear someone say, I do not know. Now, this is honesty!
Others will spit out words, in the same fashion as an "artist" splatters paint all over the place and calls the finished product art.

Where do you stand? Are you amongst the learned or are you a student? Do you know of a artist that offers all the qualifications? Where do we find him/her? Do you have a sample?

Be not selfish rather let us walk together.

[Steven Sweeney]

It

[Enzie Shahmiri]

From Artists Quotes
[QUOTE]
:: Antony Gormley :::
You're sitting there with your muse and your muse is telling you something and you

[Mischa Milosevic]

Steven, thank you. You make some solid thought provoking points. I hope we can analyze a point or to in the near future.

Enzie, thank you. This is quite interesting what you have here. One can get an idea a crumb, if I may, into the thought of each artist.


Art is really having its chance. The urge to draw seems to have taken hold of many more thousands today than ever before. It has spread across the world. While many are interested in art as a pastime or hobby, others would gladly choose it as a means of livelihood if they were convinced that their ability was sufficient to provide any real hope of success.

There will always be a certain amount of confusion about what is talent or native ability in drawing and what is knowledge of the craft. Too often, knowledge is construed as talent. On the other hand, drawing that lacks constructive knowledge is seldom successful as drawing. The truth is that we do not see the talent until the means of bringing it forth has been developed. That means is reasonably accurate analysis and understanding of the laws of nature as they apply to man's vision.

We who choose art as our medium of expression should realize that it has certain fundamentals from which we progress, just as there are fundamentals of literature, drama, or music. Unfortunately, the fundamentals of an approach to art have not usually been so clearelly defined for practical study as have those of some other creative activities.

Suppose we have two drawings before us. One appeals; the other does not. This one is good, the other bad. Why? I believe I can point out underlying reasons that are perfectly understandable. Strangely enough, the reasons are usually not found in art books or taught in classes. The response to drawing is related to the emotions and experience of the individual, and is wholely apart, so far as I know, from the teaching of art. Yet I do not believe art can go very far unless the artist has some sort of an understanding of this response. An artist can go all his life without realizing why his/her work does not appeal. Even successful artists may not really know why their work does appeal, though they thank heaven is does.

To understand why a drawing does or does not appeal, we must recognize a certain ability that is developed in every childhood through adult life. The term "intelligent perception" I think comes as close as any to describing this faculty. It is vision coordinated with the brain. It is a sense rightness developed by contact. At some time or other, our brain accept certain effects or appearances as truth, and abide by these decisions. We learn to distinguish one appearance from another, in size or proportion, in color, and in texture. All the senses combine to give us intelligent perception. We have a sense of space or depth, even if we know nothing of the science of perspective. We are quickly aware of distortion or deformity, since the appearance does not coincide with what experience has taught us is normal or truthful. Form is registered in the mind, even if we know nothing of anatomy and proportion, so that we recognize a face immediately, though we could not even give a good verbal description of it. Our sense of proportion tells us that this is a child and that a midget, or this a puppy and that a small dog. Intelligent perception includes a feeling for bulk and contour.

The minute the spectator sees change of proportion, distortion, change of form, color, or texture, he/she realizes that something is wrong. The cleverest imitation will not fool him/her. The dummy in the department store window is a dummy to everyone.

To be continued

P.S. feel free to contribute

[Mischa Milosevic]

Let us consider for a moment what made the great artists great. In almost every case they were masters of form, which means that they had to be masters of light on form. Light and form were no different then. The artist of the past had no clippings or cameras. They had to find out from life. By observation and study they learned truths which are still staring us in the face, but which we do not know or see, because we think an D70 or the Rebel is going to take the whole heavy business off our shoulders. We actually have twenty times the opportunity to produce masterpieces that they had. We are not bothered with making sketches or studies from life. The truth is we are just not bothered. The only legitimate excuse the artist of today has, and its wan thin, is lack of time. But where is lack of time taking us?

To be continued

P.S. feel free to contribute

[Mischa Milosevic]

They held the flag of excellence and they held it high