 |
| Charles Law watercolor on paper 26" x 20" Katharine A. Cartwright, NWS |
-
Entirely at the artist’s discretion.
- Intended to be tolerated by the viewer.
- Useful for filling in gaps, whether they be factual, compositional, historical, or other gaps.
- Used consciously or unconsciously, intentionally or unintentionally or in tandem.
So, this makes me ponder what it is that viewers accept and,
conversely, what they don’t accept. Denis Dutton, in his book The Art Instinct (reviewed here on this blog in January 2010) makes a strong case for the characteristics
that define the “most wanted and least wanted paintings.” His theory links the
evolution of humans and the human psyche to our aesthetic preferences. Without rehashing that book, I’d like to expand
his theory to include artistic license.
I agree with
Dutton that we are instantly drawn to form like faces, water, landscapes, flowers and
certain colors that relate to our survival and habitat. But, I think that
we’re also drawn to acts of artistic license.
We love looking at distortions, stylizations, surrealism, and altered hues
because I think it satisfies our imagination. Without the insertion of the
artist’s imagination into the painting process there wouldn’t be innovation and
the artist’s ideas would become worthless.
Even works of realism, which throughout time attract the most viewers, contain
distortions imposed by the painter who strives to make the best possible
composition with form, line, color, and value. The painter enhances the viewing experience by employing artistic license in a way that reaches our emotions.
I’d like to
think that artistic license is more
like artistic necessity. Without it,
our work would be dull and lifeless.
What’s your
opinion?
2 comments:
For me artistic license is necessity. How dull it would be if all painters painted exactly the same. Luckily our individual sensibilities make most paintings as individual as fingerprints even before we attempt to stylize or distort.
And the viewer had better tolerate what I do!! So there.
Without first looking at the law you reference, this one is festive, and has a carnival feel to it, like a magical machine that a magician would display as proof of his ability to do alchemy! I really like this one!
And after looking at the meaning of Charles Law, I still like it.
OK, I've been wanting to share this with you - don't know if you limit your laws to physics, but this is a fascinating short podcast anyway and the pianist in you will like it I am sure. In the middle is a reference to a law you may not know.. I loved this. Go here and click on "Listen": http://www.radiolab.org/blogs/radiolab-blog/2013/feb/19/speedy-beet/
Hi Dan - thanks so much for the radio feed. It was fascinating!! Having once been "the student of the student of the student of the student of Beethoven" I have a strong background in his work. This broadcast was a wonderful analysis of tempo, AND a new law for me!
Post a Comment