suction cup reality

Its true to think that young artists (20ish) should strive to develop their own techniques and perfect them over time. I have recently felt the shame of being so heavily influenced by such artists as Pollock, Klimt, Klee, Miro, Krasner, de Kooning, O'Keefe, Stills, Snyder and the list goes on. My work seemingly mocks techniques to that of those I admire most. I know and understand (atleast I feel that I do) the importance of developing a technique true to yourself. But should this be such a shameful process of apparently mocking the revolutionaries? I hate this idea. I hate that a good piece of work usually comes from the influence of another work by someone inevitably more famous than myself. Is it natural for this process to be frustrating? I am young, and in the midst of discovering my own techniques that I feel worthy enough to call my own, because it seems as though when you feel that what you have just created is new....its usually not. You are once again reminded of someone in the past that has created something similar, or mastered the technique that you are merely toying with.

As a young artist "on the market" you are naturally going to be looked upon as fresh meat. If you are fully appreciated for what you have created at the mere age of your early twenties, then what more is there? You are setting yourself up for expectations and ultimate inner failure....but thats what's expected of artists right? Inner failure calls for good art....changing art...art that continues to thrive and rotate with the time/season/era/individual/style...once again...the list goes on.

Unfortunatly its to your benefit to NOT discover "your" technique at a young age, or you will over time become numb to the forms you are creating, thus leaving you with inner failure that ultimately sends you back to where you began this viscious cycle.

Art reception

becoming

here is another one of my paintings that was recently displayed through April...its alot bigger than it appears...its actually close to 5ft. long and about 3.5ft tall.

Paul Klee vs. DNA....

A relatively new company named DNA11.com will take your DNA and create a highly digitized image of your very own DNA sequence. Each and every print that they create represents an individual person and is a "one of a kind" artpiece. To get your own print made all you do is select what size and color of a print you want, then a few days later a saliva kit will arrive in the mail, which you use and then mail back to DNA11. DNA11's labs then process your DNA to capture your genetic fingerprint, make a artistically rendered snapshot of it and mail the print back to you. DNA artwork starts at $390 and ranges up to $1300.


To me this looks relatively close to much of Klee's work....wouldnt you agree? whats happening to "Fine art"?

eye of mine

kelly moore

my idea of making a film art is about to be temporarily fixed. kelly moore, a renowned artist in the arkansas/new mexico(and much more) area, has posed the idea to make his own film art. I have contacted him in hopes of participating/helping/inspiring...not too sure yet what my job will be (if i even get one). but i am to meet with him this weekend and do a "screen test" of the sorts....i am somewhat nervous, but entirely anxious to meet him and pursue this temporary film fix.

click "kelly moore" to see his web page.

my work

these are 2 of my paintings that i just took down from an exhibit i had through april. the one on top (titled: bleu) sold within the first week...but the other one (which was my favorite; title: splurge) didnt sell...funny how that works...

refreshing

I have really been dabbling with the conceptual idea of children's art lately. it seems clear to me that kids have a LARGE grasp on the free-thinking methods of art. They are the prime impressionists and most defintely produce massive amounts of inspiration for me. This is refreshing. its nice to see a child interpret objects, buildings, and my most personally intriguing...people. They work with no fear. they dont produce art for the public, they produce art for reasons that seem to only please themselves. it seems as though they are merely showing others their work because they are proud...not because they hope it makes money, or becomes nationally recognized...they do it for art's sake.

with all of that aside. the forms children tend to create is what is most inspiring. the bodies of people or animals are never exactly what they appear to be. its this free-thinking, free lance ideology that i would love to capture in a painting. but not force the act of a childs hand....merely sink into that side of my unconscious do indulge into what it may take in order to achieve this look.

Here is a picture by a 5 year child named MAX....

This is another picture i found that seemed to trigger some inspiration:

interesting

This guys seems interesting. He draws and paints some....and also has some very interesting advice...such as how to survive if youre a hobo.

i need balls.

I have been thinking lately that i would really like to put together some sort of film that displays artistically misconstrude objects and their movements. it is an idea that i have had for some time now, but it feels more necessary now than it ever has. where i am from we have a local lake that is usually very popular, but due to the lack of rain in the last several months, it is very low. although this is economically unpleasing, the area that it is leaving dry is artistically pleasing. it is somewhat dreary...yet, entirely inspiring. there are large cracks in the mud, and footprints from all of the wondering souls that have found their way out there to check out the dry spots. there are also random polluntants sticking out of the earth, such as old tires, shoes, soda cans/bottles. this makes for a very interesting scence that i would love to dabble with while holding a camera to it.

perhaps i should dangle something from the surrounding trees swallowed by the mud. or maybe put an entirely random object in the middle of the dried mud...so that it appears to be out of place. maybe have just a person standing there...then have another person walk up and stand beside them. continue on with this until there are several people standing lined up facing either forwards or backwards....each holding large solid colored balls. still shots. noone moving until everyone is in their place and then perhaps movement may occur. should the people be half clothed, naked, or maybe fully clothed in garments unusual to their desires. it would be great if it rained while this was happening. i need a camera. i need people. i need balls.

canvas of stress

I was painting last night on a somewhat new yet old canvas (to me)....

(my boyfriend makes my canvas's for me, so i never need to buy any, unless i am having a spurt of artistic energy and he cant make them fast enough. he is also a student so its often times hard for him to find the time to make them. but hes usually pretty darn good about keeping a steady supply.)

...and was experiencing a personal challenge. the canvas had become overwhelming. i have painted time and time again on this same canvas, and it seems to defeat me each time. i have even gone as far as incorporating found objects in hopes of it becoming visually pleasing. i have tried to sit and attempt to not force anything onto the canvas, but in my attempts of not forcing it...i unfortunately force something because of the mere fact that i am trying not to force it. man...see what i mean by defeat. i feel as though even if i re-gessoed it, it would still be THAT canvas.

i am in the midst of developing a new technique. any artist out there should know and understand that developing a new technique is a huge challenge and large benefit to that of the artist's abilities. i do circles. cirlces are usually in some form or another incorporated into my work. big ones, little ones, empty ones, filled ones, organic ones....these circles i have mastered in my mind of artistry....perhaps i should post a picture of what THAT canvas looks like. so you to may be imposed upon by the canvas of stress.

what does it mean...

...when someone claims that they are an entirely self-taught artist?

i would like to propose the argument that we are all self-taught artists. now i am clearly speaking of untechniqualities that are typically taught within a classroom, such as: how to hold a paint brush, how to shade a sphere, how to draw a sphere, ect., ect. we are all at some point in our lives influenced (if not daily) by the objects and surroundings that we see. i feel as though this contributes to what an artist is and who they are amidst the canvas, not what was learned within the constraints of 4 walls.

when it comes down to it and you are facing the canvas/paper/object, it is what lies within you that contributes to the creation of a piece of work. i am not so much relapsing the classroom experiences and racking my brain to remember where to put a line when i begin a painting. it births itself from my unconcious mind and develops into what it needs to be.

now, with all of this said...is it possible to be artistically unschooled or schooled? and can we measure the quality of art by a mere diploma? answer: NO

ive conformed

it is true. i have conformed. all that i have opposed to and attempted to pull myself from since i can remember as a child and adolescence has all just crushed beneath my fingertips. i also feel as though it is cliche for me to express this conformity through my blog....

my blog.

how interesting to see, hear, watch, listen to me say: my blog.

i do feel as though it is necessary to express ones feelings and emotions through some form of art. whether blogging is your art or not...it is entirely needed for the sake of mans sanity.

my sanity exists primarily within my art. i paint. i make messes. i collaborate the two.

in hopes of creating a place to throw out all the ideas that literally swirl in my head while i am creating art.....i have created a blog. yes. a blog of collaborated art messes.