Latest posts by michael wilson (see all)
- JORDAN RIVER - February 5, 2019
- Inspired Art - August 2, 2018
- Waiting for Inspiration - July 31, 2018
- The Bridge between Painting and Photography - July 31, 2018
Being consistent with style is something we hear a lot about, especially when we start taking college credits. Personally that intention for me seemed doomed from the beginning. I quickly determined that any goal that would restrict an authentic impression was not something I seriously wished to pursue. It just wasn’t in my genes. When so many things that we do are determined, fixed and according to a fixed pattern it seems that in art, especially in art we should explore the essential nature of responding honestly. This infers no restriction on style in my view. Being bound to one particular style seemed an incredibly restrictive parameter- that paint could only be applied in one particular fashion, one style.
We naturally think of Van Gogh, of Michelangelo, of Rodin, of Renoir and we admire them because for one thing, they are so recognizable (astonishingly so) and we admire of course their brilliance of vision. These are representatives of our great masters, our genius artists and the style they implied represented them uniquely. That is undeniable. Those of us mere mortals who are trying to hammer out our own vision, cannot afford the restriction of a defining style. It goes against every pure, creative urge. If a style comes of its own after years and years of painting…well, that is a different matter. We are talking now about a natural progression which is far different than beginning a painting where the constructive form, pattern and method of painting follows some pre-conceived fashion. Being consistent with style was never important to me. I thought about it of course but it was never seriously considered as an option. We can think of a whole host of masters who wandered about with regard to style and successfully so. They were on the path of discovery. We can easily point to Gerhardt Ricther, to Kandinsky and to Duchamp. Personally I think Duchamp opted out after his breakthrough painting, THe Nude Descending the Staircase. He could have branched out to another method, another style but instead chose to abandon art entirely. I think he was too absorbed in his credentials, his legacy. He wanted to be remembered for only that one breakthrough style which at the time, put the art world on its ear.
The vast range of human emotion is far me, much too varied and complex not to handled creatively without limits of a fixed format or style. It would be like forcing every experience through this particular sieve or strainer. It tends to deaden our sensitivity to true art and true expression. In today’s world, in this art market we are looking at it may give someone a leg up, a means of being noticed but in the end and eventually the art as an authentic expression will become dry as bones.
