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.