Self portrait in striped shirt (removed)
I started to mess about with the portrait and now think I have to start again. So I will.
I have realised I like two very distinct and somewhat different styles. One is what I would call the “psychological” approach where the painting is about a message of some kind. In this “psychological” group I would include Wyeth, Hopper, Hammershoi, Dorothea Tanning, Sasha Bowles and a recent discovery , Andrea Kowch. Andrea is described as a “symbolic” painter and she claims to paint “an alternative reality”. These works are captivating, mysterious, ask questions, challenge us and are downright riveting – to me. The use of paint is almost sparing, neat and careful. On the opposite side of the equation I love painters who appear to simply love manipulating the paint - examples are Hughie o’Donoghue, Alex Kanevsky and Dan (and Danny) McCaw. It’s strange why I should adore both very different styles. It’s also dangerous to pigeon-hole people. Because there are psychological messages embedded in the work of the latter group and although the former group tends to use paint very “carefully” it would be blatently untrue to suggest they have no interest or technical ability in the use of paint. What all these painters have in common of course is their interest in the exploration of the human predicament through painting the human figure and maybe that is my main reason for liking them.
So I set out here today to do the first painting for absolutely ages. Didn’t know where to begin (I have a big painting planned but need to get my models into position etc.) so whenever I feel unsure it’s always a self portrait. I decided to let go and just “paint”. A satisfying experience.
I have realised I like two very distinct and somewhat different styles. One is what I would call the “psychological” approach where the painting is about a message of some kind. In this “psychological” group I would include Wyeth, Hopper, Hammershoi, Dorothea Tanning, Sasha Bowles and a recent discovery , Andrea Kowch. Andrea is described as a “symbolic” painter and she claims to paint “an alternative reality”. These works are captivating, mysterious, ask questions, challenge us and are downright riveting – to me. The use of paint is almost sparing, neat and careful. On the opposite side of the equation I love painters who appear to simply love manipulating the paint - examples are Hughie o’Donoghue, Alex Kanevsky and Dan (and Danny) McCaw. It’s strange why I should adore both very different styles. It’s also dangerous to pigeon-hole people. Because there are psychological messages embedded in the work of the latter group and although the former group tends to use paint very “carefully” it would be blatently untrue to suggest they have no interest or technical ability in the use of paint. What all these painters have in common of course is their interest in the exploration of the human predicament through painting the human figure and maybe that is my main reason for liking them.
So I set out here today to do the first painting for absolutely ages. Didn’t know where to begin (I have a big painting planned but need to get my models into position etc.) so whenever I feel unsure it’s always a self portrait. I decided to let go and just “paint”. A satisfying experience.
posted by Sheila Vaughan at 9:05 AM
14 Comments:
Sheila..I really like this self portrait. It shows some real deep mystery. I struggle with "style". I love art like Andrea's (thanks for the link, beautiful stuff!).I am influenced by so many artists and styles that I want to do them all. I thought if I quit looking at other artists for a while I would tighten it up and get consistent but I love looking at art and dreaming of art. I think it is good that you have 2 styles. I see that you carry some of each into the other. I don't think anyone would doubt that both styles are yours if seen side by side.
Hi Kay, now I feel a bit embarrassed because I didn't mean to imply that I myself was trying to paint in those two ways, just that I admired them. I mean the idea of the "message" being almost more important than the "messenger" (the painting)is very interesting to me though. Thanks for the visit Kay - your recent water colours with the gold are quite stunning.
Now I get to welcome you AND your art back! You're fairly inseparable anyway, so it feels as right from out here as it probably does in there. This is another great honestly self portrait. You do it so well.
Aw thanks Sam - it was good to be painting again. I see now I have elongated my face Modigliani style - got carried away with the vertical stripes I think.
Hi Sheila,
I always love your self portraits and this is no exception. So much is there -- the lively use of paint, the serious expression. And I so enjoyed your writing too. Fascinating.
XO Welcome back. I missed you, but I'm glad you had a great time.
Barbara
interesting thoughts & insights on these styles & artists. Dan McCaw is my HERO!!! I've loved his work from the first time I saw it.
Barbara, thanks for your visit. I had a most interesting time. In fact it feels strange to come home and start painting again. But I will.
Roxanne, it is you I should thank if I am to be honest. It was your reference to the work of Dan McCaw that caused me to look him up. I have now ordered his (very expensive) book as a second hand copy so I'm really looking forward to that arriving.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts about other artists and the links to them. Perhaps all artists struggle with the joy of smearing on lots of paint and the equally satisfying feeling of getting things just right in an order you have decided is strong. I certainly do, but I think my earliest artistic expressions - filling in the rounded lines in coloring books with crayons, probably mean the most to me and no matter how I try to paint more loosely I always want, somewhere inside, to stay within the lines. I think it comes from a desire to contain the whole world in a few carefully chosen lines.
Nancy, thanks so much for your contribution here. I think many of us share those feelings about "wanting to contain the world". Surely that is also why we strive for "good", balanced (by that I don't mean boring, lol) composition and harmonic palettes. Personally I feel as if I don't want to "keep within the lines" nor "paint loosely" just for the sake of those things. It is how I feel most comfortable at that 'painting point in time' that I am learning to listen to and that can be a whole variety of approaches.
Sheila - I do hope you enjoy this book! I treasure my copy of it. And if I had to toss every book in my collection except for one, this is the one I'd keep.
I hadn't thought of it before, but when I look through his figure paintings in his book, I think some of them definitely have that 'psychological' quality to them, whether it is one figure or multiple figures. Perhaps that is another part of why I'm drawn to his work. There's more to it than just 'pretty' (although his use of color & paint application really draws me in, too).
Roxanne, I can't wait for the book to arrive now! I know I shall not be disappointed. Will keep you posted!
Thanks for the links. It's such a good way to find new and interesting stuff. Did the self portrait (removed) go back on the easel??
Hi Jen, thanks for the visit. The blogging world has always, from the start, led me to people whose work I really admire and keep up on so I'm happy to post my favourite links. As to the portrait, yes, it went back on the easel, went through various adaptations as a portrait, and then changed into a woman walking a dog. I kid you not. However, it is not publishable in its current state.
Post a Comment
<< Home