Is your artwork saying something?

[Halo_n_horns]

I don't have a gallery here, I have my own site with my work...and a gallery at deviant art. I thought about starting one here though.

By all means. Unlike most other positions in life, newbies are greatly cherished here ...

 

[babiesmiles]

This discussion has come up several times in other threads, I thought a thread of its own might be interesting. I'm going to stay out of this one for a while to see what develops.

A lot of people look at artwork and seem to come up with a whole slew of messages or storytelling or just emotions that they believe the artist was trying to convey through the work. Others seem to just see the work and either find it appealing, unappetizing or appalling but not conveying of anything.

So, two questions. One to the artists, one to the viewers.

Artists, do you consciously try convey statements, emotions, moods? Or are you creating a piece just to be appealing to look at to a wide or focused group?

Viewers, what are you seeing and/or looking for when viewing artworks?

I have been drawing and writing ( not in english don't worry as I am not English first language ) since I remember of myself, although not being a professional in both fields I am rather shy with my drawings ( must be a couple of them somewhere here on Lit ) and poetries and I will never be that brave to start a thread with my poor things.

However as I draw (and write) aimed to pure selfish pleasure I mainly do it for myself , to find a way to express moods and emotions . It's a personal way to carry out an interior talk with my inner self , eventually to develope a new language to communicate more widely but always a tool to listen to my deep feelings and needs giving them a kind of audible "voice".

As a viewer I essentially look for the same things , I look for works which can give me an emotion , allow me to find a common language with the author , interweaving a mental thread between the artist who expressed him(her )self through his work and me, the receiver of that canalized creativity .

Hope that rambling make sense

 

[Halo_n_horns]

I have been drawing and writing ( not in english don't worry as I am not English first language ) since I remember of myself, although not being a professional in both fields I am rather shy with my drawings ( must be a couple of them somewhere here on Lit ) and poetries and I will never be that brave to start a thread with my poor things.

However as I draw (and write) aimed to pure selfish pleasure I mainly do it for myself , to find a way to express moods and emotions . It's a personal way to carry out an interior talk with my inner self , eventually to develope a new language to communicate more widely but always a tool to listen to my deep feelings and needs giving them a kind of audible "voice".

As a viewer I essentially look for the same things , I look for works which can give me an emotion , allow me to find a common language with the author , interweaving a mental thread between the artist who expressed him(her )self through his work and me, the receiver of that canalized creativity .

Hope that rambling make sense

A lot of sense actually. Thank you for taking the time to share it. I end up feeling like a huge simpleton after reading what some people think on this topic. I get an idea, sit down with an elephant lost in a snow storm (a blank piece of paper), and the rest becomes instinct intertwined with necassary technicalities. I think since doing art that has been for Lit in one way or another, I have actually created two or three pieces that were intended to create a message. Those, however, were requested pieces. The stuff for myself rarely contains any conscious thought process other than, "This will look cool if I don't fuck it up!"

 

[babiesmiles]

A lot of sense actually. Thank you for taking the time to share it. I end up feeling like a huge simpleton after reading what some people think on this topic. I get an idea, sit down with an elephant lost in a snow storm (a blank piece of paper), and the rest becomes instinct intertwined with necassary technicalities. I think since doing art that has been for Lit in one way or another, I have actually created two or three pieces that were intended to create a message. Those, however, were requested pieces. The stuff for myself rarely contains any conscious thought process other than, "This will look cool if I don't fuck it up!"

Thank you for your kindness .

Now I have a push more to make a creative attempt and borrowing your brilliant words, maybe it " will look cool if I don't fuck it up "

..... and perhaps I will have the courage to post something here too ! b.

 

[Halo_n_horns]

Thank you for your kindness .

Now I have a push more to make a creative attempt and borrowing your brilliant words, maybe it " will look cool if I don't fuck it up "

..... and perhaps I will have the courage to post something here too ! b.

Holding my breath for your art gallery ... please ... hurry ...

 

[babiesmiles]

Holding my breath for your art gallery ... please ... hurry ...

Thank you I will try to hurry ..... but with a broken leg it is not so easy ...lol

 

[Halo_n_horns]

Thank you I will try to hurry ..... but with a broken leg it is not so easy ...lol

Lean on me ...

 

[babiesmiles]

Lean on me ...

awww ... thank you again

 

[jason_jenn]

I think that anyone who has a personal perception of art is correct in their own way. As for the skill and difficulty put in the creation that some people search for in it, I don't think that is so important as to what it means to the audience.

If it takes the artist 5 minutes or 5 weeks to create something, it doesn't matter. What does matter is if it does something to you when you see/hear/touch/taste it. some people like wine - It takes several months when done traditionally. I like food which in most cases can be created in just a few hours.

Personally, I'm in to photography. Some of my works take several hours or days to set-up and or process... Others are just the 'point and shoot' variety. I enjoy all of the finished projects equally.

As a side note: from over 2000 photos I have taken and processed, I would only call a couple of dozen actually completed projects. In this forum, I would call everything I share as finished art projects... On the other hand, only a few of my posted pics in the Amateur Pic Feedback thread, I would call a work of art. they are simply portrayals of Jenn and I having a good time and sharing them with those who appreciate that kind of simplicity. I guess in that last statement, and corrolating it with my first statement, some may call it art, while I do not. Even though I would be the artist in question.

 

[Kcar]

Here's a painting called "White Center" [1950] by Mark Rothko ...

http://www.harley.com/art/abstract-art/images/(rothko)-white-center-(small).jpg

What's the message/interpretation/articulation? Is it art?

I love Mark Rothko ...but I couldn't tell you why. I think that as a viewer, I react emotionally to artwork, just as I do to music. I don't read things into paintings or songs, but they do evoke images in my head that feel a certain way to me. I'm passionate, so feeling something is more important to me than thinking about it. I'm also sensual, so I love the arts for the joy they bring to my senses.

I draw because I like to. An artist's line is like a fingerprint...no 2 artists draw the same way. Whatever I'm feeling shows up in my drawing at the time of it's completion. It's like a journal.

Like GD, I also think that art is about mastery, and a continual process. I will never be "there". I continue to hone...even if I'm never great (which I'm not now), it doesn't matter as much as the action of creating itself.

I taught an 8th grade (guest) art class once: I'd asked the teacher to have everyone bring in a set of headphones so that they could listen to whatever they wanted while drawing...the variety of emotional responses was interesting. I learned a lot about each child that day. One of them had a really angry drawing (I used to draw tanks and battleships as a kid, and I'm a woman. I was very angry back then.) Anyway, I told him that I liked his drawing...he immediately blacked it out. We can't hide the truth about ourselves in a drawing, painting, or whatever that we create. The black was even more informative. The shape of lines themselves tells a lot about a person. Curving lines and repeating patterns are found in all of my work. But they used to be full of sharp angles and jagged lines. I'm a contented person these days. I've had a long time to evolve (51 yrs) and I continue to do so.


As for the viewer...I love this part. As I watch people's reactions to my work, I see a wide variety of responses to the same piece. (this is when I'm in a gallery with my drawings. I stay back to listen to comments, and am tickled by the variety of responses to the same drawing.)For example, for me, Metallica's ONE was never about Dalton Trumbo's "Johnny" (Johnny Got His Gun) being trapped in his own limbless, faceless body, but about being truly alone. Not everyone will hear it the same way.



Another point: Just because an artist's work sells, doesn't make it good art. I absolutely LOATHE Thomas Kinkaid's paintings...ugh. He's made a LOT of money over the past few yrs. On the other hand, Van Gogh only sold a single painting in his entire lifetime, and that was to his brother. People pay millions for them now.


Lastly, my drawings are not fine art - they are illustrations. I know that much about my talent.

 

[SensualCealy]

Is my art work saying something? - Yes, its saying it misses Halo's complements!

Just popping on to say hey!
C

 

[Halo_n_horns]

Is my art work saying something? - Yes, its saying it misses Halo's complements!

Just popping on to say hey!
C

Don't worry, sweetie. I'm watching everything that's going on, and you're at the top of the list.

 

[MaverickMan]

I think there are some paintings/sculptures out there that have been classified as art, but are simply well done examples of self-expression. I'm a bit culturally challenged, but for example: The Scream, by Edvard Munch, is widely touted as "art." I would argue that even though his message is quite clear, it's not art because overall the painting itself leaves something to be desired in terms of quality. But that's just me.

And what about the Mona Lisa? Where is the message? It's another classic example of art, but when I see it, I see a painting of a woman. It's very well done, in contrast to The Scream, and I'd consider it art, even though I'm missing the message.

I guess I'm quality conscious. It needs to look good for me to even consider it as art. But then, you have someone that can look at random paint blotches and derive some deep philisophical meaning from them. I guess art, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Just a short comment about "The Scream". I would agree that there is not much detail or complicated painting done to complete it. But....I think that the lack of detail or clutter makes one focus on the emotion that the picture clearly shares.

Exactly what emotion you feel from that particular painting has a lot to do with your own experience. But I would guess that most people see/feel a strong emotion in that picture. That strong emotion might not have been communicated had Munch painted it in the old masters detailed style. I think the emotion would have been swallowed up in the details.

Does that mean that all art lovers will love "The Scream"? Of course not.

IMHO.

Mav