When you see a successful artist or creative person doing their thing, are you inspired and wish you could do what they do? Instead of believing in yourself does self-doubt, or the risk of rejection, ridicule or humiliation stop you? It might be the creative act itself or taking the artwork to the next level and letting other people see it that stops you. However, the need to be creative is a powerful force. When I haven’t been to the studio for a little while l feel its loss. I’m sure many people reading this can relate to the need to be creative and also the need to hide their talents.
Have you heard about the sad story about a lady called Vivian Maier who lived in Chicago? http://www.vivianmaier.com Vivian spent most of life working as a caregiver. When she died, there were over 100,000 negatives found in a storage unit in her name. Throughout her life, she hid her passion from the outside world. There is lots of speculation about why she did this, but no one will ever know for sure apart from Vivian herself. Since her death, Vivian’s work has been compared to the world-renowned photographer Henri Cartier-Bresson.
I think we build up self-doubt in our heads and it becomes a mindset that is often overwhelming. It seems that Vivian hid her gift from the world because of her vulnerability. I have also been trying to find a way to overcome the self-doubt problem. I found these words of advice from successful artists useful:
Vincent Van Gogh;
“If you hear a voice within saying I cannot paint by all means paint and that voice will be silenced”.
“To a young artist, I would say: just go day by day and see what happens. Don’t worry about other people’s judgment.”
“Ultimately, you have to understand who you are making your work for: it should be for you, that is the first thing.”
This is all very good advice but life isn’t that simple. Questions like how to find the time, how to keep positive while keeping your vision and integrity are extremely challenging.
In Eric Fischl’s book, ‘Bad Boy’, he gives some interesting advice,
“Art is a process and a journey. All artists have to find ways to lie to themselves, find ways to fool themselves into believing that what they’re doing is good enough, the best they can do at that moment, and that’s okay. Every work of art falls short of what the artist envisioned. It is precisely that gap between their intention and their execution that opens up the door for the next work.”
And Chuck Close said,
“Bread crumbs’, by working, stuff comes out of working. That is very different from dreaming something up and executing it. Inspiration is for amateurs, the rest of us show up and get to work.”
One further explanation from John Cleese.
“Most of the time we are in a closed mind, think when we are at work. There are a tension and pressure to get the work done. There are lots to be done, and we have to get on with it so there is little humour. It is purposeful time but not creative time.
Then there is the open mode, where we are relaxed and playful in what we do. We follow our curiosity as we are not under pressure. Through play, we find what we like and want to do.”
Do you have any thoughts on creativity? What do you do to enable yourself to carry on when self-doubt creeps in? Do you have any words of advice to help overcome self-doubt and procrastination? Do you feel held back from following your creative instincts?
Oil bars are an interesting art material to use due to the simplicity of their application. They are great to have in your toolkit when you want to work quickly and on a large scale to create an undercoat or to work in a sketchy graphic style. I find pleasure in using them when creating line drawings, outlines or filling large areas with a uniform colour. They are more like drawing than painting in many ways as you hold the stick like a drawing implement.
I have always found oil bars challenging to use on their own. One of the most challenging things about oil bars is the immediacy and expressive nature of the oil sticks as you can’t remove any marks. When I work with oil bars I don’t smudge the marks, even though they produce a very limited type of stroke. I find some of the outcomes created may need repainting in oil paints to vary the effect and make them more compelling.
Oil bars encourage risk taking but can also produce accidents, as they are extremely direct way of making marks with a lovely, adnominally large waxy oil pastel. I wholeheartedly recommend giving them a try and being experimental.
The sketches below show a comparison of using oil bars and charcoal on the figures. The background on both studies is mixed media.
Have you used oil bars in your creative practice? Feel free to share your successes below.
Laura Owen’s exhibition at Sadie Coles HQ in London gives a broad overview of her current work. In her paintings, she uses a range of digitally created images and painted marks in abstract compositions. Laura Owens was born in 1970 in Ohio, she began her art career in the 1990s, more recently she opened her LA studio as an exhibition space called 356 Mission in collaboration with the art dealer Gavin Brown.
I was curious to learn more about Laura Owens’s work after I read that Laura Hoptman, a Curator of Painting and Sculpture at MoMA in New York believes she is a Caposcuola, (the founder of an artistic movement) due to the way she ‘assimilates digital languages into painting’. In this review I want to explore some of the ideas in her work, and consider her use of newspaper clippings, screen printed on canvas, cropped shapes with drop shadows and impasto mark, all combined into photoshop, and ask whether this is a worthy subject for painting?
Sadie Coles HQ offers an ample white space and second small second room for some of Laura’s notebooks. The large exhibition space with its white walls is an excellent backdrop for the busy paintings. The gallery is well lit, and the show includes a lot of work. If I had one criticism of this show, it would be that there is too much work to focus on. Viewing the exhibition starts well, but there is a repetitiveness of painted digital imagery, and after twenty or so large canvass the show as a whole feels overwhelming. I did wonder whether that was intended because it is so obvious.
I see Owen’s work as a way of creating a dialogue about the man-made visual world, and focusing on technology that turns everything into pixels and data. A visible world where we can find new ways to tune in through our portable devices which are constantly changing.
The use of technology in paintings originated with Pop Art, from Warhol’s screen prints to Hamilton’s and Blake’s collages took art in a new direction. Laura’s use of sources makes me think about Matisse’s cut-outs and his use of collage and the way a composition is composed of editing, refining and manipulating shapes. Laura’s pictures appear to be predetermined on the computer before they arrive on the canvas including the painterly gestures such as washes, dabs and swipes. I was curious whether there is a space for spontaneity in her process.
Owens method like Matisse, Hamilton’s and Blake’s is a form of semiotic play. There is a decorative element where a shape is cut out and put into a composition creating a visual rhythm and visual language. There is a laying of images on top of each other where the contrasting elements with particular colours and elements in space give the work a striking ambience.
The result is a play of tension and expansion to create dynamic pictures. It is a system for thinking about shape and composition and expanding the possibility of what we visually consume, which I find it exciting and playful. It is very visually engaging and brings up many questions about Laura’s reliance on printing techniques, where her ideas come from, and the freedom of viewer to make associations in a picture. As a result her work is undeniably a commendable subject for painting.
However, I believe that Laura’s work would be stronger if seen smaller doses as there are too many elements in the exhibition as a whole. I don’t feel the need to revisit the exhibition for repeated viewing as I do after seeing a Francis Bacon exhibition. Maybe this is because the compositions appear to be predetermined on photoshop, but possibly it is more to do with the overwhelming number of paintings on view.
Laura has created a vehicle to show what she sees, the work in the show is undeniably a visual sensation. Her work asks new questions about the most important kinds of processes of expression. One of the most interesting things about this exhibition and why I recommend seeing Laura Owen’s work is that it is a critique of abstraction and about seeing the things in between the obvious stuff.
I prefer a buttery, creamy paint; that is easy to manipulate and handle. This is why Michael Harding’s Artists oil colours have become my first choice. The strength of colour in the pigment is evident. There is luminosity that speaks volumes, making my work stand out. The flow, workability, usability and colourfastness of the paint is highly relevant to me.
I have noticed some other brands add less linseed oil in their paint, and this affects the usability and finish. Drier paint gives a matt finish while paint with more flow gives a glossy finish. I have found that tubes of oil paint from other manufacturers with slightly drier contents will become unusable over a year or two, and this is very frustrating, though a hard, dry tube of paint can be useful at times if you require a matt finish. I found that the best solution is to use a medium as mediums improve with handling and can increase the glossy finish.
Do you use any of these products in your daily practice? Your welcome to add your thoughts and start a conversation below.
Over the years of visiting art exhibitions, few exhibitions have had such an impact on me as the Abstract Expressionist exhibition did at the Royal Academy. I was staggered by the amount of impressive and inspiring works. The first few galleries are hung in chronological order, then the order in the galleries changes and the work is hung related to styles and approaches, some rooms have work by more than one artist. This changing approach works well as it easy to understand the relationships and contexts between the works in each room.
In one of the largest rooms, I found two of David Smith’s sculptures and one of Jackson Pollock’s drip painting next to each other, it was a stimulating experience. David Smith’s sculptures ‘Hudson River Landscape’ 1951 (welded painted steel and stainless steel), and his ‘Star Cage’ 1950, (painted and brushed steel) sat opposite Jackson Pollocks’s drip painting ‘Summertime number 94’, 1948, (oil enamel and commercial paint). What was so intriguing and absorbing was how the lines in the three different works were so alike. Pollock’s dancing splats of paint over the surface were heightened and intensified by the Smith sculptures. I have always delighted in interesting and complex spatial compositions and having these works next to each emphasised their associations. While Smith calls his work, ‘drawings in space’, Pollock presents his as ‘energy and motion made visible, memories arrested in space’. This juxtaposition of two and three-dimensional space was enlivening, inspiring and delightful to experience.
Later l found work by Frank Kline. I always appreciate looking at Franz Kline’s work and this was the first time I had seen ‘Vawdavitch’ 1955 and ‘Andrus’ 1961, (both are oil on canvas). The simplicity of the subtle change in the colours and the spatial harmony is very enjoyable. I think Kline’s work has a strong relationship with poetry and music. When I look at Kline’s work it always amazes me how ‘less is more’. I always think of the Mies Van der Rohe quote when looking at reduced and distilled work where simplicity is beautiful. It looks like Kline used a wide brush to create ‘Andrus’ 1961, he uses a few simple brush gestures in layers of mars black, cadmium orange, crimson, cerulean blue and deep purple mixed with different amounts of white. The simplicity is intriguing and really sparked my imagination.
If I had a criticism of the exhibition it would be that you need more time to see everything, I found it challenging to select only a few pieces of works to discuss in this review as I really did feel blown away by seeing so much artwork of such a high standard. After a couple of hours, l needed a break. Having spent so much time with the works I have mentioned and looking at some of the pieces by other artists I felt guilty walking past further great pieces of work because I felt my eyes and brain needed a rest. It would be great if you could revisit the exhibition on the same ticket on a different day. I would happily go again.
If you would like to read more, there is an interesting review here on the Saturation Point site written by Paul Carey Kent, after visiting this show and the at the Museo Guggenheim, Bilbao: 3 Feb – 4 June 2017 and comparing the shows.
Eric Fischl was born in 1948 in New York City, his suburban upbringing and career as an internationally acclaimed American artist is presented in his book ‘Bad Boy’.
Fischl shares his deep wounds when discussing his personal relationships, especially with his depressed and alcoholic mother. These troubling experiences made their way into his artwork creating a dialogue about his personal wounds and ironically they ultimately lead to him getting into trouble.
The death of Fischl’s mother inspired the work he became famous for. It is interesting that after his first solo show in New York at the Edward Thorp Gallery in 1979 and the following success lead to him ‘going off the rails’ as the book title suggests and he enjoyed success a little too much.
Fischl’s book is informative and helpful to other artists. There are interesting advice and tips on how to deal with the process of being a successful artist and he discusses the issues and ideas in his work.
Eric Fischl says in the book,
“Painting is a process that guides me back through complex experiences that I didn’t have words to describe or understand. It relieves feelings and memories and brings them forward with clarity and resolution. Each one of my paintings is like a journey, a process to excavate nuggets of emotion, artefacts of memory, the treasures buried in my unconscious. My imagery evokes feelings that were once too painful to ephemeral or too embarrassing to articulate or even to remember.”
Eric Fischl’s ideas are well developed and considered as you would expect from someone who has had international success as an artist. He uses clear, convincing and honest language. I think the book is a good read and has lots of information and advice about dealing with life an artist. I enjoyed reading it and strongly recommend it.
Often I think viewers look at works of art and immediately ask themselves why did the artist make this? Understanding the original idea or intention of why I made it defeats my ambitions for this artwork. Instinct led me to paint this painting. My aims are never going to be clear.
“the only thing that matters in art is what that cannot be explained.”
A person viewing an artwork comes to see the work with their own unique background, knowledge, and history. Art does not have a purpose and function like a design. It is not essential to try and understand why I made this artwork. The artwork now exists on its own, and it has to stand up by itself.
Everyone sees things differently. Two things are put together, and they create meaning. The best artworks in my eyes mean different things to different people.
Like Duchamp said;
“the artist has only 50% of the responsibility and that is to get the work out, it is completed by the viewer.”
I’m interested in this part of myself where this artwork comes from. The parts of life I am curious about exploring and that I am hung up on. I’m not in control of what comes out. Creativity is instinctive, and it is buried within me.