Why should artists strive for balance?

This is an important question that Arnheim poses in the first chapter of his book Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye. I'll paraphrase his answer. One reason is that by stabilizing the relations between the various aspects of a painting, the artist creates a work of art that is unambiguous. Ambiguity confuses the artistic statement because it leaves the observer hovering between two or more assertions that do not add up to a whole. But, Arnheim provides an additional answer, which involves our psychological make-up. He states that man strives for equilibrium in all phases of his physical and mental existence, and that this same tendency can be observed not only in all organic life, but also in physical systems. From there he ventures into a wonderful discussion on the principle of entropy and the universe. However, this is not the final point. On page 410 of his book, Arnheim introduces "dynamics," the counter-principle to balance. Although I haven't yet fully digested that principle, I can tell you that there must exist a tension between the elements on the painting that the artist must balance. I prefer to see it as a dynamic equilibrium. Take a look at my wine painting at the upper left. There's a lot of tension and interplay between the shapes, hues, etc. That's tension. I had to balance those tensions by considering the weight of each element (discussed on the blog two days ago). I think it's balanced pretty well, but I suppose I could do better. It's all about experimenting and having fun with it. Like a "mad scientist" in her lab at midnight howling at the moon! Now, there's and idea for a painting :)

Balance: Left vs. Right

These are paintings from my Wine Series (gouache on Arches paper, 19" x 15") and I'm using them to illustrate another point from Arnheim's book. My previous post was a synthesis of Arnheim's ideas about visual weight and description when establishing balance in a drawing or painting. Continuing with the balance theme, he examines the influence of the left cerebral cortex of the brain which is dominant in most people upon our perception of elements placed in the left and right halves of the visual field of a work of art. BTW - the left cerebral cortex controls speech, writing, and reading. Here's a paraphrase of three points:

If there are two objects equal in size and one is shown in the left half and the other in the right half of the painting, the one on the right will look larger. In order to make them appear equal, the one on the left has to be increased in size.

Most people read pictures from left to right. Therefore, it's easier for us to see, for example, a rider traverse a picture from left to right. If the rider traverses from right to left, the viewer must overcome resistance and invest more effort to read the painting. It slows down the viewer.

The right side of a picture is more conspicuous and carries greater visual weight. To compensate, the artist must pay more attention to the left.

If I had to "nutshell" Arnheim's book, it's really about how the artist must create optical illusions to get his/her point across. This author tells us how the "normal" brain works and what the artist must do to compensate for that. I'll share a little more on the next post.

Balance: Weight and Direction

I've been reading Rudolf Arnheim's book, entitled Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye. It's a rather lengthy book (500+ pages) but contains a lot of important insights. Today, I'm considering Arnheim's discussion about how weight and direction influence the equilibrium, or balance, in a work of art. His point is that the direction of visual forces can depend on the attraction exerted by the weight of neighboring elements. Here are some of the factors that determine the weight of these elements:

1. The distance from the center (greater distance = greater weight).

2. The greater the depth an area of the visual field reaches, the greater the weight it carries.

3. Size (larger = heavier)

4. Bright colors are heavier than dark. (example: red is heavier than blue)

5. Intrinsic interest areas are heavier (keeps the viewer's attention longer)

6. Isolation (example: the sun or moon in an empty sky)

7. Shape (regular geometric shapes carry greater weight)

8. Compactness of an arrangement.

9. Orientation. (vertical orientation is heavier than oblique.)

Interestingly, Arnheim notes that weight counts more in the upper part of perceived space than in the lower. I'll go into "sidedness" another time. Prior to reading this book, I hadn't given thorough consideration to weight and direction in such a comprehensive way. It's time to do some experiments and see how this works! More on that, later.

If Not Now ... When??

In the morning, when I get out of bed and begin to think about "today" and all its possibilities, I say to myself "If not now ... when?" That's how I run my life. There's so little time and so much to do that's fun and rewarding, so why put it off? What am I waiting for?

I apply this advice to my career as an artist all the time. It would be easy to procrastinate and not pursue opportunities to exhibit, or paint an idea, or do some research, etc. It would be easy to give into feelings of insecurity that inhibit creativity.It would be easy to find excuses not to go to the studio. But, how could that enhance my life? And, what if my life is too short? Today IS the day. Carpe diem, y'all!

(P.S. this painting is one of a long series, gouache on paper 6" x8", that I call "The Twenty Minute Challenge." When I stay in hotels, I allow myself 20 minutes to paint a scene in the room. Usually, I'll complete five or six scenes before I check out. This is one from a Holiday Inn. They're lots of fun to do and provide me with a visual record of where I've been).

Planning for the Future

Every year I take time to think about what I have or have not accomplished as an artist as I prepare for the future. Now that we're in the fourth quarter of 2009, it's time to reflect and plan. I thought I'd share this with you because I've found that setting forth a clearly defined set of goals for the upcoming year has had a positive influence on my career as an artist. However, I'm careful not to set seemingly unattainable goals (like having my work acquired by MoMA in NYC this year!). Rather, I examine each sector of my career to imagine what could be possible; what will move me in a forward direction. Here are the sectors that I consider:

1. The direction of my work. How can I further develop the series of paintings I'm working on? As I continue to develop concepts for a new series, which one should I select? (I always work in multiple series during the year).

2. The quality of my work. First, I must honestly evaluate the quality of what I've done and identify the problems. This extends beyond the painting itself to the matting and framing. One thing that helps me evaluate quality is to look at the works of others who've achieved a higher level of mastery. This comparison points out the obvious flaws in my work.

3. Juried exhibitions: How many juried exhibitions did I enter this past year and what was my success rate? Which juried exhibitions give me the most "bang for my buck?" Entry fees are steep and some exhibitions just aren't worth it. So, I must decide which I'll enter in the upcoming year.

4. Solo exhibitions: I can't manage to do a major solo exhibition every year in addition to all my other art activities, so I must decide if this will be the year to push for another solo exhibit. Sometimes I'm invited, sometimes I must knock on doors. (BTW - I was invited to do a solo exhibit this year and have accepted - but that'll be the only one in 2010).

5. Grant applications: Usually, if I have a solo exhibition coming up I look for grant support to help defray the costs of the materials, travel, and advertising. So, I'll be writing a grant proposal this January for my upcoming exhibition in June. In the past, I've had good luck with this.

6. Continuing my education in art: Should I take a workshop or course this year? Probably not in 2010. I'll be too busy. So, I'll pursue reading art-related books, visiting museums and galleries, discussions with professional artists, etc. as my method for continuing education.

7. Teaching art: I'll be teaching workshops all over the country in 2010 about concept development for painting and am fully booked. So, no planning needed there. As I look to the future, I'm almost fully booked for 2011 and planning 2012. So, the only thing I need to plan is NOT to overbook!

8. Reflective time: Yes ... I must schedule time to reflect in a productive way that yields results. This is a discipline that requires formalizing thoughts and ideas through journals and/or research. So, I think about what my daily schedule should be when I'm not on the road teaching. I like the schedule I established this year: paint for two hours in the morning, spend three hours in reflection/research/journaling. Paint during the afternoon. Reflect for an hour after dinner. Once it becomes a habit, it's easy to do. Without reflective time, it's easy to veer off course and can be detrimental to my work.

9. Finances: This is the worst! I hate bookeeping, budgeting, etc. But, I keep an Excel spreadsheet and record all my income/expenses on it so I can keep track of how I'm doing and also make it easier to file for taxes. At the end of each year I consider which sectors of my art activities yield the highest income. Sales of paintings? Awards? Teaching? etc. This doesn't necessarily influence how I'll divide my time in the future, but gives me an idea of how I can pay all my bills in 2010! And, I must pay attention to that.

10. Connections: Which artists have helped me advance as an artist and person? How have my associations either helped or hurt me? Is there a relationship that I need to change? How can I be a better friend to the people who have befriended me? How can I extend to others in the art community to build a mutually beneficial professional relationship? How much time can I realistically spend on this and not sacrifice studio time, etc?

Advice

This is a self-portrait that I painted in oils about a decade ago. It's entitled My Vanity, and is a double entendre. The physical space where I apply make-up
is a vanity, and the reflection I'm seeing is the one I'd prefer to see without all the wrinkles and age spots. The fly on the mirror is an 18th century symbol for death - the ultimate reality that vanquishes vanity. What does this painting have to do with today's blog about advice? I'm using it to illustrate the point that when advice is given, we all need to look at ourselves in the mirror (psychological mirror, that is) with objectivity to see if the offered advice is warranted. If, individually, we don't know who we are as artists - if we haven't taken the time for self-examination and recognition - then it's hard to know which advice, if any, is good. So, it's well worth thinking about Ben Shahn's comments that I posted a long time ago. Ask yourself "What kind of person am I" and "What kind of art coincides with who I am?" After you've done that, you'll know if advice "fits" or not.

That being said, here's some advice from well-known artists that may, or may not, be useful to you:

Henri Matisse - Look at life with the eyes of a child.

Jasper Johns - Take something. Do something with it. Do something else with it.

Constantin Brancusi - Create like a god, command like a king, work like a slave.

Salvador Dali - Do not strive to be a modern artist: it's the one thing unfortunately you can't help being.

Paul Gaugin - Do not finish your work too much.

Vincent Van Gogh - If you hear a voice within you saying, 'You are not a painter,' then by all means paint, boy, and that voice will be silenced.

George Green - Early on get rid of the idea of rejection, so that you can receive rejection over and over again.

Jerry Uelsmann - In the arts there are many right answers. I've learned over the years that when you get a clue to another possibility to follow it through ... Ultimately, my hope is to amaze myself.

Edgar Degas - The secret is to follow the advice the masters give you in their works while doing something different from them.

Winslow Homer - Look at nature, work independently, and solve your own problems.

Eric Fischl - What experience has shown me is that it takes your life to become an artist.

The Value of Solitude

(This painting just won an award at the 29th International Exhibition of the San Diego Watercolor Society, and also was sold)

Artist Reg Butler (1913 - 1981) once remarked: I work alone (I haven't found a way of working other than in considerable privacy), and I go to quite considerable lengths to insure that ... I don't find it possible to lose myself in the activity if there are other people around.

I have to admit that I work in the same manner. So many times, other artists have asked me to paint with them or to join a group of painters. I've tried, but the distractions keep me from thinking deeply about all the decisions I have to make as I paint, so I end up with wasted time and materials. Also, for some reason, group painters feel obligated to comment on each other's work as it progresses. This can be harmful because it may influence the artist as he/she is painting and remove any possibility for originality. So, I've been working in isolation for years now. On rare occasions I've enrolled in week-long painting workshops where I learned a few important things. However, it was always challenging to concentrate because of all the socializing. Don't get me wrong - I love being with people, but not while I'm working. Here are a few other artists that agree:

Leonardo Da Vinci: The painter or draftsman ought to be solitary, in order that the well-being of the body may not sap the vigor of the mind.

Edgar Degas: It seems to me that today, if the artist wishes to be serious - to cut out a little original niche for himself, or at least to preserve his own innocence of personality - he must once more sink himself in solitude.

Pierre Alechinsky: What interests me most about the act of painting is that it is a solitary act ... Of course, when one is faced with a canvas, one is no longer alone, and the sense of solitude diminishes. This can be an agreeable passage of time. In fact, solitude then becomes a kind of companion.

Three important steps

Over the past couple of days I've had to resolve a technique problem in oil painting. One leg of my research included reading Juliette Aristides' book Classical Painting Atelier (2008). I heartily recommend it, and want to discuss an important point she made which builds upon an earlier blog about the first step in becoming an artist.

Aristides wrote: The student must take three important steps before he can make progress:
1) His mind must be trained to know what to look for
2) His vision must be honed so that he sees these things in life, and
3) His hand must be trained so that he can execute his ideas as he envisions them.
In other words, the ability of the artist's mind to understand a subject precedes his ability to execute what he sees.

I like the emphasis she places on the training and coordination of the mind-vision-hand in order to advance in the creation of art. But, there's much more to it. Aristides also wrote: Painting is an expression of the soul. The artist has the ability to reorganize and order this world to convey the internal aspect of life. The job of the artist is not to repeat or transcribe what he sees, but to interpret it. A technician copies but an artist transforms. The artist condenses and embellishes upon life.

I think this is a great message to budding-artists or to those who have veered off course. I think Degas nailed it when he said that he lies in his art to tell the truth!

Finding Solutions

Winslow Homer once said "Look at nature, work independently, and solve your own problems." I'd like to focus on the last part of that statement. As an artist, solving my problems is discovering solutions. There are a variety of avenues that I can take to arrive at a solution, and here's an example. Those of you who've been following my work for awhile know that some of my posted eggshell paintings are repeats. That's because I've been busy for the past two months preparing 34 oil paintings for an upcoming solo exhibition next June. Half of the canvases were completed last year, but the rest are new. It'll take me a few more months to complete all of them, so my eggshell painting is on hold for a couple more months. Yesterday, I hit a technical "wall." I've been painting for decades, but just couldn't find the proper technique for rendering two of the paintings. After experimenting for weeks without success, I put down my brushes yesterday and spent some time reviewing old notes to see if I'd forgotten something. Nope! Couldn't find anything. So, where can I find other possible solutions? Ask advice from professional artists, read more books on oil techniques, keep experimenting, step away for awhile to refresh my creative mind, complete a series of indepth analyses of successful paintings to discover a useful technique, and - my favorite - persevere! Don't stop until I've found the answer. I love this aspect of painting: the challenge of problem-solving. Isn't that part of being a "professional" artist? If I were a professional button maker I'd have to exhaust every avenue to find ways to solve production problems so that I could fill orders on time with a quality product. I couldn't just give up. And, as Homer suggests, the artist needs to be independent. How successfully I solve this technical problem depends very much on my personal and independent decisions. Now ... back to problem-solving!

"Artist" vs. "Professional Artist"

In response to my last blog, Margaret Ryall raised an interesting point about making a distinction between the label "artist" and "professional artist." This is worth exploring, and the criteria she posted made me wonder how the term "professional artist" is defined in other countries. So, I found a website for the International Federation of Arts Councils and Culture Agencies, http://media.ifacca.org/files/DefinitionArtistAnalysis.pdf that provides an interesting analysis. If you don't want to read it, I'll share the highlights.

According to UNESCO (1980) " 'Artist' is taken to mean any person who creates or gives creative expression to, or re-creates works of art, who considers his [sic] artistic creation to be an essential part of his life, who contributes in this way to the development of art and culture and who is or asks to be recognized as an artist, whether or not he is bound by any relations of employment of association."

The UK establishes what makes an artist professional in principle:
"While there are several interpretations of what constitutes a professional 'artist' a broad interpretation is any arts practitioner working in the arts ... be they creative or interpretative, who either makes or endeavours to make a living from their work. A professional artist will also be defined through peer recognition."

Ther term "professional artist" is usually formally defined by countries for tax purposes and benefits. Therefore, the definition varies from country to country. However, there are identified five common approaches, which I'll briefly state (if you're interested in the fleshed-out defintions go to the website):

1. Definition through membership: a person is defined as an artist through membership of a recognized artist association (e.g. a society of professional artists).
2. Definition by committee: artistic status is determined by a committee, such as a committee of 'experts' or of artistic peers.
3. Definition by authority: the taxing authority determines eligibility.
4. Definition by association with artistic output: i.e. an artist is someone who produces art
5. Definition by the nature of arts activity: an artist is deemed professional if their arts work is undertaken in a 'businesslike' manner.

In the USA, our IRS defines nine criteria in its definition of a "professional artist." I'm certain that you're familiar with those if you file taxes in this country.