What is Art?

Author Denis Dutton concludes the first chapter of his book, The Art Instinct, with a synopsis of the evolution of human features and capabilities beginning in the Pleistocene (1.8 million to 11,000 years before present). The author makes the point that somewhere in this evolutionary time period, humans developed the instincts to produce and appreciate art and so, the arts were born. I like to think of it another way: the arts were born in a refrigerator! That is, Earth was in the midst of a great Ice Age when the arts were developed. Enormous contintental glaciers covered vast regions of the globe and human populations thrived in lower latitudes where vegetation could grow. But, I'm getting side-tracked.

In the second chapter, Dutton asks the timeless question What is Art? How many definitions have you seen for "art" during your lifetime? It's like trying to get a firm grip on a mass of jello. However, I'm intrigued that he decided to tackle this question and will unwrap only the first few pages of the chapter here. On the next post I tackle his set of criteria for what makes art.

Back to the introduction of What is Art? Dutton begins by asking if it's possible to define a universal aesthetic or art theory. To clarify his point, he cites the philosopher Julius Moravcsik who stresses that a transcultural investigation into art as a universal category must be distinguished from an attempt to determine the meaning of the word "art." OK, so it looks like we need to separate the two ideas and search for the boundaries and attributes that define art. The author notes the difficulty of such an endeavor because of the organic nature of "art" which changes in focus and values through time. He also sheds light on the fact that art theorists are usually influenced by cultural bias and personal idiosyncracy as well as philosophical rhetoric. Of course, all of this leads to intellectual arguments and general disagreement about what is art.

Dutton makes a clever observation about the paradoxical situation that exists in aesthetics today as a result. He states that scholars and theorists have greater access to a greater number of works of art than ever before in history but write analyses mostly about the outliers in art at the expense of attending to the center where a universal theory of art might be found. It's like defining the entirety of a forest by describing only the trees at its edge.

So, how does the author expect to overcome this paradoxical situation and provide us with the answer to What is art? He intends to go into the center of the forest and find that which naturally defines it. He will find those characteristic features of art that move across cultural boundaries and find universal acceptance.

If you want to have fun, speculate about what those characteristic features might be in advance and see how closely your ideas match his!


P.S. A personal note: I just finished all 34 canvases in oil for my show in Maine and have returned to watercolor today. It's good to make the switch about now since I was working in oils for nearly a year :)

The Universality of Art and Artistic Behaviors

Art is tied to human nature, according to Denis Dutton in his book The Art Instinct: Beauty, Pleasure, and Human Evolution. I'm intrigued by this idea and hope to discuss it here. Prof. Dutton was kind enough to comment on yesterday's blog, so perhaps he could give us additional insights as we continue to examine his book.

The author writes: Across cultures on this planet there has emerged the art of storytelling, drama, painting, music, bodily adornment, and all the other arts. I'll add that this is true for even the most remote and isolated populations that have little to no outside contacts. So, it seems that wherever people exist art exists in some form.

Dutton also writes that shared human psychology (e.g. the impulses of the same fundamental human nature) means that the arts should follow similar histories even in different nations. Although I didn't find specifics in the text to support this idea, it's not difficult to imagine the development of art forms evolving from primitive tribal expression with primitive materials toward more derived work with greater complexity as time advances. However, I've noticed that today there exist a few cultures that have retained primitive tribal art forms to the exclusion of other forms over millenia. Does this mean that there's not a universal tendency for art to evolve from primitive to complex with time? Could it be that these cultures need technological innovations and exposure to the art of other cultures to create more complex forms of art? And, is increasing complexity the natural outcome of time? That is, does human nature lead us to add layers of complexity to our creations as time advances in our individual lives?

I'll venture from this book a little further to ask if complexity in art is desirable. This is a bit of a slippery slope, because what is seemingly "simple" or "primitive" can also be very complex when closely analyzed. So, we'll limit the word "primitive" as it's applied here to mean unsophisticated or naive work that is not highly derived and complex. Returning to individual taste, what type of art do you prefer to view: complex or primitive? What do you prefer to create, a more complex work of art or a one that's more primitive in style and content?

I'll return to this interesting chapter in Dutton's book tomorrow.

Your thoughts??

The Most Wanted and the Least Wanted Paintings

Due to the generosity of our good friend Carolyn Abrams (http://carolinamoonarts.blogspot.com/) who gave me this book as a Christmas present, I'll begin a discussion of the theories offered in The Art Instinct: Beauty, Pleasure, and Human Evolution by Denis Dutton, Professor of the philosophy of art at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand. Thank you, Carolyn. This fascinating book unites art and evolutionary science and makes us consider the roots of our artistic nature. I'm captivated since I am both an artist and have a graduate degree in paleontology.


The first chapter, Landscape and Longing, was an eye-opener! Perhaps I'm too ill-informed and the rest of you already know this, but Dutton mentioned an international project I'd never heard of: Komar and Melamid's People's Choice Project that resulted in a report on the artistic preferences of close to two billion people around the world. I'll summarize the outcome for you as it's stated in the book, but will also refer you to the project's website if you want additional information

• To read about the project itself, look here: http://awp.diaart.org/km/intro.html
  
• To view the survey itself, look here: http://awp.diaart.org/km/surveyresults.html


• To view the most and least wanted paintings in each surveyed country, look here: http://awp.diaart.org/km/painting.html (I need to clarify that these paintings were produced after the poll was taken to represent the preferences resulting from the poll data. The respondants never saw these paintings. Also, these paintings weren't intended to be good ones, just reflections of the popular preferences).
  

Here are bits of the author's remarks about this intriguing survey:

Komar and Melamid are Soviet artists who were originally trained as socialist realists. They relied on a professional polling institution to administer the poll.

At the conclusion of the poll, these artists actually painted the most wanted and least wanted paintings for each country (website above) based on the favorite colors, shapes, and subject matters.

The least wanted paintings are modernist abstraction. According to the author, people in almost all nations disliked abstract designs, especially jagged shapes created with a thick impasto in the commonly despised colors of gold, orange, yellow, and teal.

Almost without exception in every country, the most wanted paintings are a landscape with water, people, and animals. The overwhelmingly favorite color in the world is blue, according to this poll.

Being a master of graduate-level multivariate statistical analyses, I can tell you that almost all statistical analyses are flawed, and often fatally. This survey is not without problems, some more serious than others as the author points out. Despite the problems with this survey, Dutton finds one stunning fact is revealed by it: people in very different cultures around the world gravitate toward the same general type of pictorial representation of a fairly uniform type: Kenyans appeared to like landscapes that more resembled upstate New York than what we might think of as the terrain of Kenya. So, perhaps the appeal of the blue landscape is universal to mankind.

Why is this so, asks the author? It's not too far a stretch in the imagination of an evolutionary biologist to see the connection. Humans evolved seeking water, vegetation, animals, and other humans to survive. What we've sought for milennia becomes imprinted on our brains as desirable.

But, there's more! Dutton cites any number of scientific studies related to human evolution in specific environments and other psychological polls. I won't enumerate them here, but they're worth reading about if you want to pick up this book. A study by Elizabeth Lyons shows that contemporary women prefer landscapes with vegetation in them more than men do. Her hypothesis is that the role of ancient women as gatherers and men's role as hunters led to this natural preference in art.

The author concludes this chapter with: We are what we are today because our primordial ancestors followed paths and riverbanks over the horizon. At such moments we confront remnants of our species' ancient past.

Your thoughts??

Holding the Big Picture

We've arrived at the sixteenth and final principle in Ian Roberts' book Creative Authenticity. Yay! and Whew! This principle is entitled "Holding the Big Picture" and is the author's final piece of advice about process and product. He begins by noting that artists at all levels frequently fail to keep the "whole" picture in mind when painting the individual parts of it, which leads to troublesome inconsistencies.

Roberts' process is to begin with an inspiration (whatever moves him to paint), thumbnail sketches to simplify and to compose (dimensions of the thumbnail sketch must be in direct proportion to those of the canvas or the design won't work), and painting a grisaille (grayscale underpainting) before moving onto the final coats of paint. My process is very similar to this one.

But, Roberts notes, artists frequently become sidetracked as they paint and fail to keep the "whole" painting or inspiration in mind when concentrating on specific smaller areas of the work. So, he gives us some remedies like:

• sit away from the canvas for awhile and think about it to rediscover the idea that was initially intended.
  
• evaluate the three contrasts of painting: value, hue and intensity; if one particular area isn't working, put your hand over it for an overview of the rest of the painting to will reveal what the incorrect area should be like.


• examine how the eye is led through the painting to see if you created a path through and around the entire surface.


• as you paint, continually step back and evaluate the painting from a distance; hold it in front of a mirror as well as in different orientations; anything that isn't working will become more apparent.

Roberts also exhorts the reader to visit museums and select a few paintings to study and draw. He writes: Doing this exercise of drawing a painting, studying the shapes and proportions, engages us far longer in the learning process than when we just look at it passively. How true! These suggestions have always worked for me, along with other "tricks." However, Roberts warns us that his process may be too "up-tight" for many painters who prefer a spontaneous loose approach. So, I guess we must do whatever works since there are no hard and fast rules that govern process.

And so, the book ends.

I'll quickly sum-up my opinion of this book. It contains some gems, but also some biases that too narrowly restrict the meaning and definition of "art." To me, that's contradictory to what it means to be "creatively authentic." However, much of the advice is helpful and worth pondering. Roberts' writing style is comfortable for the reader, although he tends to ramble on (like me!). Nevertheless, I would recommend Creative Authenticity to beginning artists.

A special THANK YOU to those of you who have commented throughout these postings. I'm indebted to you for making this a shared enlightening and meaningful experience!

BTW - the image above is my special place to meditate. This is the Clark Island shoreline located a short walk from my home in Maine. It's a lovely remote place to sit and think, and on occasion , to see my grown son speeding by in his boat far off in the distance looking for lobsters.

Your opinions?

Finding Poetry in the Everyday

The fifteenth, and next to last, principle in Ian Robert's book Creative Authenticity is entitled "Finding poetry in the everyday." This is about finding our own "voice" as an artist, or addressing the issue of our personal poetry. Roberts extends this thought to define art in terms of a poetic expression. The work of our good friend Mark Sheeky (http://marksheeky.blogspot.com/) is a good example of an artist who is both a poet and painter (and musician, I might add). However, Roberts isn't referring to written poetry. By poetry, he means the vision of the artist.

During the past few months I've frequently posted this idea in many forms, so I won't beat a dead horse today. However, I will include these words from the text: The essence of this whole artistic enterprise is to focus your attention on what caught your attention in the first place. Respond to what is yours. Your truth... You must strip the thing back to the basics of what you feel about your response ... Get to the foundation and then build it back up.

As you know, I agree with this viewpoint and try to discourage derivative work that is copied or appropriated from another. There's only one way to be unique and meaningful in art, and that's to express your own ideas and feelings. But, getting in touch with oneself means investing in spending time with one's own thoughts. I do this by asking myself very basic questions that almost always start with the word "why." Why do I like that? Why do I keep staring at that? Why does that make me feel happy, sad, angry? Why can't I stop thinking about that? and so on. Be your own Grand Inquisitor. Get to the heart of who you are - that's where you'll find your inner voice.

Over a decade ago, when I decided to learn watercolor painting after formal training as an oil painter, I attended a week-long workshop. It was expensive! The first three days of the workshop I couldn't get my instructor to pay much attention to my work or even give it a substantive critique. He spent lots of time with the other students but kept glancing at my work and passing by. On the fourth day I became a little angry because I needed input and because I felt like I'd just wasted my time and money. So, I politely asked the instructor why he wasn't commenting on my work. His response was "I don't need to. You already know how to paint, you just haven't found your voice and I can't do that for you." Well - a lightbulb went off in my head! All those college art courses and no one had ever mentioned this to me.

So, I went home and began thinking "how" do I find my voice? How does anyone do that? After a few years of fits and starts it dawned on me that my work was imitative because I lacked confidence in my own ideas and feelings. Once I realized that, I quickly got over it. Of course, it's an endless journey because my thoughts and feelings change with age and experience. So, the questions and answers to who I am never cease. But, doesn't that make things interesting??

Your thoughts?

You Are More Than Creative Enough

Sometimes a small voice singing the most beautiful song reminds us of the myriad of creative possibilities that exist within each of us. Or, to put it another way, even a "birdbrain" can create something beautiful. The fourteenth principle in Ian Roberts' book Creative Authenticity reminds artists that "You are more than creative enough." By that, he means that ALL of us possess more than enough brain capacity for creativity. The author writes:


Own your creativity. You are a creative being by nature ... the question is not whether you are creative enough but whether you will free yourself to express the creativity that is uniquely yours.


So, being creative enough isn't the problem. Rather, it's our courage to explore and gain experience; to fight our fears about inadequacy. The point is, when it comes to our art, we fear too much. We fear that we're not creative enough, smart enough, inspired enough, skilled enough, etc. We often fear what other people think about our art and ourselves.

One of my favorite quotes is from Franklin Delano Roosevelt's first Inaugural Address: The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

and

Mark Twain: Do the thing you fear most and the death of fear is certain.

and

Bill Cosby: In order to succeed, your desire for success should be greater than your fear of failure.

Perhaps this is the year that we'll conquer our remaining fears. I take my cue from the sparrow who has no thoughts other than to sing her song at the top of her voice without inhibition.

Your thoughts?

Marketing Our Work

I wasn't going to post this weekend, but felt the urge to start a conversation about marketing. When I wrote a post about New Year's resolutions a little while ago, many of you expressed the desire to more aggressively market your work in 2010. This might be a good time to discuss that and swap ideas.

First of all, be certain that your work is ready to show (see earlier blog on this). First impressions are often lasting impressions. If people associate you with undeveloped or technically flawed work, that impression might be hard to shake later on. Make your first impression a good one!

I'll begin this conversation by briefly describing the strategies I've used that have worked and also some of the ones that I'd like to try in the future.

List 1: What's worked for me

1. Our city hosts an outdoor fine art fair that is high quality and very restrictive. No crafts allowed and only originals may hang for display. Prints and reproductions may be shown, but only in portfolios. I've had huge success with this particular fair for a couple of reasons:

• I hang only one series at a time to show mastery and consistency.


• I engage people walking by my booth in friendly chatter that leads them to examine my work, but I do not "pressure sell" ever!
  
• My prices are fair, and not underpriced (never undervalue your work!)


• Last year, I teamed up with a noted sculptor who has tons of clients, and we displayed our work together. I was amazed at the crowd that gathered in our booth and purchased art.

Usually I sell more this one afternoon at the fair than I do for the entire rest of the year. I've also been offered a solo show at a gallery by a director who stopped by my booth, which I accepted. Additionally, I liberally hand-out my well designed business cards and brochures and usually receive calls during the year from new clients.

If you select this method, be very careful about the quality of the fair and try to find those that advertise well and feature mostly fine art. I should also mention that the booth fee for my fair is only $35! Low overhead is a must if you don't expect high volume sales.

2. The internet. I've been fortunate enough to sell directly from my website. However, there are so many scams that you really have to be careful. I've never had a bad experience, but just this weekend someone tried to purchase one of my paintings with a bogus certified check. Luckily, I knew it was a con and called his bluff. Here's a tip: if you decide to sell work from your website, post realistic prices alongside the art with a description of the piece (title, medium, size) and set up a shopping cart through PayPal. Also, remember to charge your clients for shipping and sales tax if applicable. Try not to ship work already framed. Most clients want to select their own frames and it will save you money not to bother.

3. National and Internal juried exhibitions. Over the past couple of years I've sold a number of paintings at juried exhibitions. The prize money they offer helps, too. My work is enhanced at these exhibitions because works are usually hung in a professional manner in a lovely setting along with terrific work by other artists. Most paintings are priced high, and I keep my prices high along with them.

4. Galleries. I rarely work with galleries because they take 50 - 60% of the price and the owners are sometimes difficult to deal with. However, some of my work does sell this way. Be cautious about galleries that ask you to pay them for publicity, opening-night expenses (refreshments), rent for wall space, etc. This is not good. Also, if you decide to work with a gallery, get a contract! Make certain you are paid in a timely manner after your work sells, and make certain that your work is properly displayed.

5. Interior decorators. Often, these professionals need to find art for their clients and are usually happy to keep your brochure or portfolio on hand. At one point, I established a business relationship with a decorator in Jamaica who picked up my paintings by boat from Miami where I shipped them. It was a great system and profitable as well.

6. Referrals. Sometimes people learn about my work through others and contact me to see what's available. It's good to follow-up with these folks because they're usually serious buyers.

7. Keep a high profile. I publicize my name and my work wherever and whenever I can. If people notice that you're a continuous presence in the art world they'll have more confidence in your professionalism and the value of your work. In other words, no one wants to invest in the work of a "one hit wonder." Be obvious, be productive, and be consistent.


List 2: What I'd like to try in the future

1. Internet sites like ebay, Etsy, Folksy, Imagekind, Facebook, RedBubble, 1000 markets, etc. This will take some time to learn, but sales are made on these sites.

2. A reputable gallery in a major metropolitan area like New York City. I've shown in a few galleries in New York over the past several years, but haven't developed a long-term relationship because it's expensive and difficult to spend time in the city trying to get appointments with gallery directors who probably won't be interested, anyway. But, that doesn't mean I won't give it a shot!

What are your ideas???

Being Ready to Show

HAPPY NEW YEAR everyone!! I hope that 2010 brings you joy, peace, prosperity, and boundless creative expression!

In his book, Creative Authenticity, Roberts touches upon a topic that's the source of confusion and intimidation for many artists: Principle 13 Being Ready to Show. I was only 18 years old when I first exhibited my work in a regional juried competition, and was too naive to feel the intimidation of being exhibited and judged alongside veteran artists. When I took first prize in my division, I didn't realize just how lucky I was. Fortunately, this experience was followed by a series of failures that taught me a great deal about what it means to be "ready to show."

So, what does Roberts say about this? A mature sense of critical judgment of our own work is vitally important in developing work for galleries. The author emphasizes the importance of diligently working in our studios to create art rather than spending those precious hours trying to market our work to galleries, internet sites, etc. He writes: The outlet will come when the work is ready. Trust it. Personally, I haven't found this to be true. Over the decades of sellinig paintings, I can think of only a couple that I sold outside of my direct marketing efforts. Maybe you've had a different experience ??

Moving on ... Roberts asks When is it [our art] ready? Good question. Recently, I read someone's comment on a blog asking "How do you know when your painting is finished?" My answer has always been that you know it's finished when additions begin to detract from the intended effect and when the work itself satisfies all the principle elements of painting.

But, we aren't always our own best judge and Roberts suggests that we should seek qualified artists to critique our work, even if we have to pay them to do so. I regularly do this, although I seldom pay for the critique, and it's a good idea. However, you'll need to scrutinize the advice you're given.

Last June, I posted some comments about how I handle advice and criticism while trying to stay true to my own vision for my work. The key is to FILTER! I use three filters. The first filter allows comments given by those with expert knowledge who are motivated to help me grow as an artist to pass through and removes those with lesser motivations. The second filter removes comments by others that reflect personal preference rather than objectivity. The third filter is then applied to remove inhibitions from my own thinking. What's left after filtering may be used in conjunction with the fundamental principles of painting to evaluate my work. What's the flaw in this filtering process? I have holes in the mesh that sometimes allow things to get through that shouldn't. So, as I paint I try to recognize that and selectively eliminate those thoughts.

Roberts concludes that we artists need to become effective evaluators of our own work. We learn this through experience and exposure to other works of art and, I'll add, through studying with accomplished artists. He feels that we may turn to those same artists to learn if our paintings are ready to show. Additionally, viewing our work in a public setting alongside the works of others provides us with the opportunity for comparison, which assists us in evaluating "readiness." I advocate for entering juried exhibitions. If your work is good enough to be juried in, that's an indication that your work is "ready" to be shown. If it wins an award, that's a stronger indication. While it's true that subjectivity exists in the judging process, repeated acceptance of your work into regional, national, and international exhibitions indicates that you're "ready." This approach also builds your resume', gives you and your work greater exposure, and allows you to legitimately set higher prices for your paintings.

Finally, I'll add that it's important to believe in yourself. You WILL meet with rejection now and then, and maybe even a lot. Don't let it stop you. Either your work isn't ready or you haven't found the right venue for it. Either case may be changed by your efforts, and your efforts rely upon your attitude and creative solutions. But, you're not in this alone ... there are many artists who generously provide good advice, encouragement, and support. Turn to them.

Your thoughts??

Limits Yield Intensity

Limits Yield Intensity is the title of the twelfth principle in Roberts' book Creative Authenticity. The central thesis statement for this principle is: History has shown that art can give expression to soaring heights of feeling. But those works of art are carefully crafted on a foundation of simplification, form and limitation. The limits yield the intensity.

I'd like to elaborate on that idea by relating to you three experiences that led to my development as an artist:

Before I entered kindergarten, my mother encouraged me to draw and learn color theory through what many would consider to be limiting conditions. She wouldn't allow me to use a published coloring book in which you crayon between the lines. Rather, she handed me blank pieces of paper with a set of crayons and encouraged me to create my own designs. Additionally, she placed clear bottles of colored water on the windowsill so that I could layer them to create secondary and tertiary colors. Furthermore, both my father and mother admired my work and instilled in me the self-identity of "artist." So, with limited tangible materials I was able to advance in art beyond most other children my age. I'm not implying that I was the best artist in the neighborhood, but rather that I had a more intense experience with art at that age.

We weren't wealthy, so by the time I entered college as an fine arts major, I had to conserve cash in order to purchase the required materials for classes. I didn't have enough money to buy much, so I made do with what I had. To this day, I believe that this was a great benefit to me. Arriving at creative solutions with so little intensified my ability to find new creative solutions.

As an adult with greater resources, I've learned that purchasing the "latest" art materials and gadgets can lead to confusion. And, that expressing a myriad of ideas in a single painting is also confusing and ridiculously ineffective. So, I've had to impose limits: stick to one concept per painting, reduce the number of hues to help unify the work, question every element in my painting to see if it's even necessary, and so on. The point is to avoid confusion and ineffective painting by setting limits that intensify the quality of my work. Less is more can be a very useful adage!

Your thoughts??

Working Method

Principle 11 of Ian Roberts' book Creative Authenticity is entitled "Working Method." Roberts rambles a bit in this chapter, but eventually arrives at a few useful pieces of advice that I'll simplify:

• Impose a foundation for your work before you begin painting.


• Put meaning into your work.


• Give your work your full attention.


• Don't be sloppy, lazy, or hurried - it will all show.


• Love your process - that will show, too.


• Evaluate your work as objectively as possible.


• Practice, practice, practice.

The author concludes by writing: when we engage attentively and honestly, pay attention to the insights that come to us, see our denial and faulty thinking and engage in uncovering the obstacles and blocks to our expression, we understand that art is a wonderful medium for personal growth.

I guess what Roberts is telling us is that WHAT we do is important, but HOW we do it is equally important. Perhaps, as we set goals for 2010 it might be good to add to our lists not only WHAT we want to accomplish (the goals) but HOW we want to accomplish.

Your thoughts?