Miles Davis once said - 'learn it all (talking about music theory) - then when you play - forget you know it' (I'm paraphrasing)
yes - there is a 'visual artist's take on this as well. play as if you are a child - with all of this theoretical knowledge underneath. easier said than done! mm [Ron] When I was an illustrator, I would set the scene as much as I could, then let it paint itself. this allowed the client to get what they wanted and allowed me to be creative, however, this was not always the case. I put out a lot of crap on the direction of a client who had no "eye". Ironicly the ones who controlled the process payed the most and received mediocre art, the ones who let me direct got greater art for less. When I taught, I really focused on developing the aspect of recognizing quality in art over technique and theory. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike > Craghead > Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 1:12 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [MD] Painting > > > Peter Corteen wrote: > > Hi Mike, > > > > I think 'accident' is an important part of painting. As I > said, when > > doing that painting, I found it impossible not to think or > plan even > > though that was my intention. I tried to make an > unpremeditated mark > > but as soon as it was there it suggested a meaning and this > > unavoidably informed the next mark. > > > > You could say there are no accidents in human doings, only lack of > > attention. You could say there is no good or bad, only ignorance. > Hi Peter! > > Tricky, isn't it? Planning not to plan; trying not to try; > intentionally doing something unintentional. > > Maybe that lack of attention can be helpful: Maybe the way to "get > there" is to take a page from Douglas Adams, who says that the trick > in learning to fly is to throw yourself earthward, then allow yourself > to be distracted at the last moment so that you forget to hit the > ground. > > Perhaps if you do the equivalent of that with painting, you can > "accidentally" manage to paint that mark without "thinking" about it. > And what shows up? Maybe brilliance, maybe garbage, but certainly > something to start with: a smudge of pure Dynamic Quality. > Then you can > tune your intellect back in and add the static framework that can > magnify the dynamic inspiration and deliver something "Great." > > Same deal with "method acting:" you manage to modify your emotional > state to such a degree that you are behaving "truthfully," saying the > lines as written (static), but exactly as you would say them if you > were really the character thinking them up (dynamic). > > Or with music: the song is already written; crafted, static. > Then, the > performance: all dynamic (hopefully). > > I'm out of areas of expertise, but I'm sure that anyone could expand > this to their own realm... it's been called "flow" and "in the zone" > and a bunch of other swell names... but it's all the same creature, > isn't it? > > Mike > > > > > > On 26/09/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Hi Peter, Marsha, et al > >> > >> Peter said: > >> > >>> "I recently did a painting where I deliberately tried not to think > >>> or plan as I worked, that is virtually > impossible > >>> to > >>> > >> do > >> > >>> but at least you can hold the intention; the result was quite > >>> > >> interesting > >> > >>> but now I know I can knock them off like that any time I question > >>> it's value." > >>> > >> Mike says: > >> Art is about balance, between the nuts and bolts > (technique, medium, > >> static quality) and the inspiration (emotion, dynamic > quality, etc). > >> If the balance is off, the art is low quality. If the goal > is to get > >> cash, your whole process is fueled by "how to make money," so it > >> becomes an almost entirely cerebral and "without soul." > But if you're > >> too far in the direction of "just letting it happen," > nobody but you > >> is going to get much out of it. Of course it is a "perfectly valid > >> way to work," but fewer folks will see it's value, unless > the artist > >> "accidentally" conveys some static quality during the > creation of the > >> work. > >> > >> Mike > >> > >> > >> -----Original message----- > >> From: "Peter Corteen" [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 00:55:57 -0700 > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Subject: Re: [MD] Painting > >> > >> > >>> Hi Marsha, > >>> > >>> can an artist's work be any good if the intention behind it is > >>> driven by > >>> > >> the > >> > >>> $? > >>> I don't think so, but in some cases yes. And of course > artist's have > >>> to > >>> > >> make > >> > >>> a living. > >>> > >>> $ is obviously not so important for you and that must > afford you a > >>> rare freedom of mind. > >>> > >>> I only ever sold one painting, a commissioned portrait; > so $ is not > >>> so important for me either. Still I could not give them > away, unless > >>> it was one that I didn't value > >>> > >> but > >> > >>> in that case I'd probably paint over it. > >>> > >>> Many years ago when I was in the Gurdjieff 'work' I > remember reading > >>> in > >>> > >> one > >> > >>> of their revered books that people must pay otherwise they won't > >>> value > >>> > >> what > >> > >>> they've gained, and I think there is some truth in that. > Of course > >>> there > >>> > >> is > >> > >>> payment in kind but that's even better. > >>> > >>> You mentioned intuition, I recently did a painting where I > >>> deliberately tried not to think or plan as I worked, that is > >>> virtually impossible to > >>> > >> do > >> > >>> but at least you can hold the intention; the result was quite > >>> > >> interesting > >> > >>> but now I know I can knock them off like that any time I question > >>> it's value. The great part of my experience in the world insists > >>> that there > >>> > >> is no > >> > >>> value (in that painting) because there was no consideration. But a > >>> > >> growing > >> > >>> part of me (I hope) says that really that is a perfectly > valid way > >>> to > >>> > >> work. > >> > >>> Also, I taught Alexander Technique in the past and a continual > >>> problem I > >>> > >> had > >> > >>> when working on people was that I should not charge them > because I > >>> was > >>> > >> not > >> > >>> 'doing' anything for them - this is difficult to explain > unless you > >>> have some experience of the Alexander Technique which is > about 'non > >>> doing'. > >>> > >>> Changing winds, the only evidence of life? > >>> > >>> > >>> Regards > >>> > >>> -Peter > >>> > >>> > >>> On 24/09/2007, MarshaV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Peter, > >>>> > >>>> I only destroyed my 'personal journal' after my husband > died. My > >>>> art journals and sketch books, I destroyed last > February. I think > >>>> you might be right that it was ceremony, and probably in both > >>>> instances. I like creating ritual and ceremony. They may be > >>>> conscious or unconscious. It's making an idea a more substantial > >>>> > >> event. > >> > >>>> About the paintings, they are shadows of the experience, > so I have > >>>> relatively no problem parting with them. Of course > there are some > >>>> I am attached to more than others. Those I do take to the > >>>> Goodwill, I take with the hope that they find a good > home (wherever > >>>> that might be). With me it is all about the experience of > >>>> painting. > >>>> > >>>> I would prefer not to link $ with my painting. Most of > my life was > >>>> directed towards making $. Much of that was for very good > >>>> reasons. But the winds changed and I find myself > moving in another > >>>> direction. Some of this direction is dependent on > intuition rather > >>>> than thinking, so it is difficult to find the words. > >>>> > >>>> But who knows, the winds may change again. > >>>> > >>>> Marsha > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> At 04:14 AM 9/24/2007, you wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi Marsha, > >>>>> > >>>>> the way you describe getting rid of your journals and > sketchbooks > >>>>> > >> after > >> > >>>> your > >>>> > >>>>> husband died sounds like you were ceremoniously > stepping forward > >>>>> with resolution to a new life and throwing them out was > a way of > >>>>> making > >>>>> > >> sure > >> > >>>> that > >>>> > >>>>> there was no going back on your decision. I think that > is partly > >>>>> how > >>>>> > >> I > >> > >>>> felt > >>>> > >>>>> when I threw my stuff away. > >>>>> > >>>>> I am glad to hear that you didn't throw away your paintings > >>>>> though! > >>>>> > >>>> Giving > >>>> > >>>>> them to Goodwill sounds like a good idea but not one I'd be > >>>>> capable > >>>>> > >> of > >> > >>>>> having myself. The only honourable option open for me > is to try to > >>>>> > >> sell > >> > >>>> them > >>>> > >>>>> - on E bay if necessary. I think giving them to Goodwill is to > >>>>> > >> undervalue > >> > >>>>> them. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards and thanks for your reply. > >>>>> > >>>>> -Peter > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On 21/09/2007, MarshaV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> At 11:21 AM 9/21/2007, you wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Marsha, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> do you know why you destroyed your journals and > sketchbooks; of > >>>>>>> > >>>> course > >>>> > >>>>>>> that's a rhetorical question and only for you to answer for > >>>>>>> > >> yourself. > >> > >>>>>>> I have destroyed journals too in the past mainly because they > >>>>>>> > >>>> contained > >>>> > >>>>>>> private/embarrassing stuff and I got fed up of holding on to > >>>>>>> > >> them. I > >> > >>>>>> don't > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> currently keep a journal now, probably because I know > I'd write > >>>>>>> > >> stuff > >> > >>>> in > >>>> > >>>>>> it > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> that I'd later want to throw away. Now I wont write anything > >>>>>>> that > >>>>>>> > >> is > >> > >>>>>>> throwawayable. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The subject of your email was 'Painting'; if I recall > you don't > >>>>>>> > >>>> usually > >>>> > >>>>>> sell > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> your work, so you must have many 'works'. I'm in the same boat > >>>>>>> > >> and > >> > >>>> have > >>>> > >>>>>> many > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> items from many years ago that hold I on to, I gaze > at them and > >>>>>>> > >>>> wonder > >>>> > >>>>>> about > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> improvements but I practically never go back and alter. I'm > >>>>>>> > >> destined > >> > >>>> to > >>>> > >>>>>> lug > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> all those canvases around for the rest of my life; a labour of > >>>>>>> > >> love? > >> > >>>> Will > >>>> > >>>>>> my > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> son have to throw them away for me after I die? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> regards > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -Peter > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Peter, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm not sure, but I wanted to know what it would be like not to > >>>>>> > >> have > >> > >>>>>> them. These were my art journals, sketchbooks with > poetry. My > >>>>>> personal journals I burned a year after my husband died, on the > >>>>>> > >> date > >> > >>>>>> of our anniversary. A couple of months after that anniversary > >>>>>> > >> date I > >> > >>>>>> woke up and took all my clothes (everything) to the Salvation > >>>>>> Army. I had become quite unglued. Not sure why I > destroyed the > >>>>>> stuff more recently, curious maybe. It was a tea party, an > >>>>>> > >> emptying. > >> > >>>>>> I do identify with the stacks of paintings situation. > A couple > >>>>>> of years ago (maybe less, maybe more) I took a bunch to the > >>>>>> Goodwill Store. But I have again many, too many. I've giving > >>>>>> some > >>>>>> > >> away. I'd > >> > >>>>>> love to give more away, but to whom? I'm not sure who > would want > >>>>>> one. I told my son that when I die to take them to > the Goodwill. > >>>>>> Maybe some will find a good home. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Very much a labor of love. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks for writing. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Marsha > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 16/09/2007, MarshaV <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Greetings, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> A few months ago, I destroyed 15 years of > >>>>>>>> > >>>> journal/sketchbooks. This > >>>> > >>>>>>>> morning I started a new book. Thank you. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Marsha > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list > >>>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > >>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > >>>>>> Archives: > >>>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > >>>>>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list > >>>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > >>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > >>>>> Archives: > >>>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > >>>>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > >>>>> > >>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list > >>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > >>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > >>>> Archives: > >>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > >>>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>> Moq_Discuss mailing list > >>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > >>> Archives: > >>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > >>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > >>> > >> Moq_Discuss mailing list > >> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > >> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > >> Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > >> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > >> > >> > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > > > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.0/1049 - Release > Date: 10/4/2007 8:59 AM > > No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.0/1049 - Release Date: 10/4/2007 8:59 AM Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
