I could wake up earlier to draw more, but the problem is that I am physically and mentally unable to draw when I am tired, or draw well anyway. Some things you can push through, others demand a kind of mental focus only available to well rested, and for me drawing is one of them. In college, my creative writting got more creative on the edge of unconsciousness, my math ability quickly devolved to the point I couldnt count my fingers. So I have been working around each days schedule. I find time to draw here and there, while the kids are at summer programs, I sketch trees at the park while Simon plays baseball. I get the most work done once the kids are asleep, but even then I like spend some evenings with Leslie. So even in the summer when I have "nothing" to do, its still hard to find time to draw, but in a good way.
I am arguing with myself about how to approach art. I am by no means an absolutist. But I have been trying to stick to general approach and philosophy. I said in an earlier post I am tired of creativity and overthought, underdone art. I have been drawing from observation for the past month. When you draw from observation you just have to pick something intersting and using a well defined skill set capture what you see on paper. I am attracted to the simplicity of the process and the lack of a need to write long explanations of why you did what you did. A well done observational drawing "speaks" for itself and in my opinion its worth is self evident.
Part of the reason that I dont like the term "creativity" is that many people equate creativity with no rules, or breaking the rules. To me there is no value in this kind of creativity. Breaking rules is easy and the results are usually underwhelming. I dont like Jackson Pollock. I know he is a pillar of contemporary art, but all he did was drip paint; No rules, no discipline, extremely "creative". You dont need any training to paint like Jackson Pollock because there are no rules to learn, no knowledge that needs to be aquirred, and no skills that need to be mastered. In my opinion there is not much difference between one Pollock painting and another.
My observational drawing was a sort of rebellion against this brand of creativity through anarchy. I want discipline, rules and boundries. I think true creativity is just what the term implies to create. To make something intentionally. To use the rules to convey an idea on purpose. This doesnt mean that all art has to be realistic, and look like a Rembrant. But I think the best art reflects knowledge of the world and how to communicate; what colors make a particular skin tone, what arrangement of lines will attract the eye, what shape of the eye will convey anger. I wanted my art to demonstrate what I know about drawing realistically. No tricks, no long statements explaining my philosopy (like the one I am currently writting), just drawing from life.
This summer I have drawn a bamboo plant, simons boots, a pineapple and eggshells. Drawing from observation is a good mental workout. To do it right takes tremendous mental discipline. Keeping things in the right places, the right sizes and capturing all the relevant detail is a lot of work. So far I havent liked my results. I am not as good as I want to be. I have spent so much energy capturing all the details that the work as a whole has suffered. It is a fools game to try to capture every detail, The better you get the more frustrated you will become, because you will always see more details to record. I have been reminded of something that I constantly I tell my students, "simplify", "the life of a drawing is not in the details, it's in the structure." The big relationships. Two of my favorite artists, Chuck Close, and George Seurat, best work is great because of its lack of detail. Chuck Close, does paintings that literally have no details. The whole painting consist of abstact non specific shapes yet these shapes are held together by a grid structure which orders the meaningless shapes into stunning likenesses of real people. To me it is the tension between the ordering structure and the random meaningless elements that makes his paintings so interesting. I was forgot this durring my observational drawing sessions. I drew every leaf of that bamboo plant and every section of that pineapple, and as satisfying as it was to conquer the technichal challenge, the drawing and the drawing process lacked life. I could hear Big Z from "Surfs Up" say , "no joy".
I didnt know whether I should simply push on through or try a different approach. I was disturbed, I went downstairs one morning and I did the drawing of the tree comming out of the bean without any reference images, it was all from my head. Working from my head I felt freer to work on the composition. I was able to relax and just enjoy the process of drawing. And most telling of all I think that the tree is much more interesting piece than the others. It was the first time in this summer I felt like I was making "Art". Regardless of whether it fits with my philosophy I could plainly see that the drawing was better than my straight forward drawings from life. So what do I do now?
Am I selling out and taking the easy path? If I simply worked harder on my observational drawing would it beging to take on more life (probably). I think like most things in life I need to avoid dogmatic thinking. Instead of approaching art as if I already know the answer I am experimenting, learning what works and figuring out why. There is value in observational drawing and undoubtably my experience drawing trees from observation informed my informal drawing session. But there is also more to art than simple copying, I am learning that for me it doesnt feel like I am making "Art" untill the image comes from inside not outside. Maybe as I work through this I will learn a more useful definition of creativity.
No comments:
Post a Comment