Blog

Many of you may know that I have recently been dabbling in abstraction, or more specifically, non-representational work.  This means, I am painting with shapes, colors, and values that have no resemblance or intentional resemblance to anything in the "real" world. I have also been teaching a class called "Beyond Reality" for the Bemis School of Art at the Fine Arts Center of Colorado Springs at Colorado College (that's a mouthful) where I encourage my students to push their work beyond the reference in the real world.

Abstraction is a term that is often used by many to mean "non-representational"; however, abstraction exists on a continuum.  Many painters of realism use some degree of abstraction in their work.  In fact, a strong abstract design is crucial for any painting to work; whether it's something recognizable or not.  The Abstract Expressionists of the 1950's are probably most recognized for the introduction of non-representational, or non-objective, work to the art world.  However, this type of work already existed long before.  I think of Hilma af Klint as one of the forerunners. She has only recently begun to receive the recognition she deserves for this new way of painting. She was a Swedish (yay Swedes!) painter whose works were some of the first purely abstract Western art.  Her unique artistic shapes and symbols developed from her beliefs in Theosophy, a type of spiritualism popular at the time.

Vincent Van Gogh is considered the Father of Modern Art or of Expressionism.  My work on the film, "Loving Vincent" only added to my love and appreciation for his vision.  I began my painting career as do many artists, as a realist.  I enjoyed learning and perfecting the art of making a scene look very similar to the reference from which it was painted.  I believe I became skilled at that and eventually developed my own unique voice within realism.  I generally enjoyed pushing color and using impasto brushwork in an expressive way.  I suppose that is why I was chosen to work on the film and was able to emulate Van Gogh's style.

In the past several years, especially since my work on the film and my slight "obsession" about Van Gogh and his life, I have become less passionate about painting realistically.  I have become enamored with exploring the relationships of shapes, values, colors, and textures on my canvas and have found a new freedom from the need to make images that look recognizable.  This has not always proven popular among my colleagues, my collectors, and, at times, my husband (but he supports me none-the-less). Even I have been doubtful at times as to where this will lead.  Thoughts such as, "what if people begin to think that I've 'lost it', or that I have forgotten how to paint/draw properly" have plagued me as I move away from the safe moorings of reality.  

Yet, I cannot stop this new way of working.  I have found that my sense for strong design has improved greatly.  One cannot simply rely on how much something painted resembles something; as if that is the gold standard for whether someone is or is not a good artist.  In fact, I believe, it takes great skill and hard work to become good at non-representational work.  And I am a long way from that.  But the journey has proven to be one that excites me and offers endless fodder for exploration of my medium.  

I can't help but think, as I often do, that if Van Gogh were alive today, this is the type of work he would be doing, too.  He was never beholden to what was fashionable at the time.  I love that he was fired from working at his Uncle Cent's art print sales company for, among other issues, refusing to sell prints based on how well they matched someone's sofa!  He loved telling clients what they should be buying instead.  Vincent was all about learning from the masters that he admired, and then moving in his own, unique direction.  The "Starry Nights" and "Sunflowers" we see everyday on socks, mugs, and ties today was completely revolutionary during his time.  And, for the most part, it was despised by the general public.  

Fast-forward to today.  I believe in some ways that the public has circled back to a preference for realism once again, though I am certainly no oracle for the world of art.  Tastes come and go.  But, for me, the artist, I must follow my passions.  As did Vincent.  If he were alive today, he would probably be in awe of the infinite variety of art that exists in the world, not to mention art supplies, like acrylic paint!  And I believe he would be dabbling in all kinds of work.  Maybe he would be an unknown, like most artists, as it's getting really tough these days to stand out from the field, to be unique.  What would he think of Jeff Koons and his giant tulips in Paris (as a Dutchman, perhaps a fondness)? Or Damian Hurst's dead animals in tanks.  I do know that he would have an opinion! I think he would encourage any art that expresses one's passion, whether realistically or otherwise.  

In the end, I have to believe that he would be patting my on the back and encouraging me to follow my passion, to work hard, and above all, to keep painting.  Thanks, Vincent.  I will.