Musings: 11/01/09, Painting...Fruit; by John

Painting, Painting and Fruit

Most people have a variety of interest. One of mine is painting. I like impressionistic art, but my own may not fit that genre precisely. I don't use pure colors, but rather blend colors to try to capture a scene such as it might be at a given moment in time. If it includes animate objects, they too will not be supine, but caught in a moment of time.

To my mind there are really only two acceptable types of painting. One looks as if a camera caught it. The other suggests reality without the extreme detail of the other, an impression. Cartoons are included in the latter. The first was definitely needed and required by the public before cameras were invented. Portrait artists frequently use a bit of both. They show the detail of a camera, but they also add another dimension that the camera can't capture except in series, such as movie clips. Good portrait artists suggest some of the ephemeral features of their subject. The Mona Lisa is probably the best extant example of that.

To others, cubism, and surrealism are admired. Except for Dali's "Self Portrait in Liver" I've never cared for either one. I prefer the old masters whose technique I have not been able to copy. I tend to use Bob Ross' wet on wet technique. I do vary it somewhat applying more detail on dry, or almost dry canvases.

I think art is a purely subjective thing. Each one of us sees things differently, and if we attempt to produce art, we naturally do it differently. Grandma Moses became famous for her rustic work late in life. Many now considered great artists had little or no market for their work. Other people
capitalized on the artist's work after their deaths. Picasso became famous after he decided to become a surrealist although in my estimation he was a greater artist when he produced paintings more lifelike than a camera can capture.

I also believe many true artists are never given any credit for their work. "Starving artists" is a term that can be applied to artists in every age. Others of less talent and skill became famous because of other factors such as their love life, political and, or, religious connections.

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" is a phrase that comes to mind, so is painting, sculpture, carving, music, writing and mechanical or technical productions. What really bothers me is faddism. Art to many people is simply that which others admire. It becomes a property to be obtained and gloated about if not worshiped.

My advice to would be artists is, express yourself in what you do the way you want to do it and don't copy someone else just because it is popular. You can learn from many without becoming a copycat. Their art may prove to be a fad in time, and if it does, you've wasted your skill without giving to the world at large something you alone could give.

Personally, I like the "art" I do even though frequently I think it is terrible when it is finished. Usually in time, I grow to like it, so whether anyone else does or not, it is both important and fulfilling to me. If others do like it, I am thrilled that I can please them. I continue to attempt scenes I think are beyond me, and sometimes I am surprised that I handle it very well. At other times, the wastebasket gets rather full, and some of my canvases may be layered with more than one picture on them. Either way, I express myself as God's child. My hope is that my life will please Him. If I can please viewers in the process, I find that great!

As God's child only you and He really know what you are capable of. If you haven't done it, why don't you try to find out? His creation is full of material you can use to bring appreciation to others around you. You may add something valuable to other's lives. Not every vine bears fruit. Some bare only thorns, but every Christian bears fruit! (John 15:5).