I suspect that most artists, especially absract painters, would resent all attempts to demystify the process of painting. This may apply as well to poets. I say this not because I believe artists are like pseudo shamans. I say it because I truly believe, based on my own experience, that art-making (beyond the matter of craftsmanship) IS mysterious for the artist herself. The psycho-aesthetic dynamics of the process are inherently mysterious reflecting unconscious as much as conscious processes.
I think I've read that deKooning was very much opposed to the "theoretical" efforts at explaining and justifying modern art typical of abstract expressionists like Motherwell (who was the most intellectualistic of the group). Before them we had the cryptic theosophical explanations of Kandinsky.
Yes, if you come across a reference to the film that would be great. But your observation that he spent much time looking at his canvas and applying paint in short bursts is itself the kind of information I would seek from such a film. Thanks
"Pollock" was the most extensively demonstrable film I think I can remember as far as indicating thought processes and technique. Of course, they had the short film that was made showing him in action, something we wouldn't have for Van Gogh, for instance, and actually not much on any of the other abstract expressionists. I agree that these artists especially want one to view the result -- the action in in the painting and we don't really need to know what gyrations they went through to create it. It could end up looking rather comical.
There is a documentary of Robert Rauschenberg I've seen and it does give a lot of information about how he creates his work. It's very well done and worth seeing more than once.
LW, the Rauschenberg film sounds very interesting. I love the painting portions of his mixed media works.
It was on PBS titled "Man At Work" and I note on the Amazon page there is also a film about Jasper Johns.
Robert Rauschenberg "Man At Work"
I checked out of our public library films on the work of Johns, Miro, Schwitters, Picasso, Matisse, and Soustine. It was a great evening.
Oooh, good thinking, JL.
I once saw some films on artists at the Fox Venice, must've been back in the late seventies. I remember seeing Olitski, Barnett Newman, think I saw Pollack; am confused on who else, ah, memory.
The last Kurt Jackson exhibition I went to (a touring one of vast works, sponsored by the Arts Council) was brilliant and what made it even more so was the film of him painting one large piece plein air - well over 3 metres across - he worked on unstretched canvas on the low cliff top. Not a word is spoken, just the sound of the sea and the painting evolving - it was shown brilliantly with the finished piece behind the video so that you could constantly look up and back.
sheer magic
On my VOOM satellite Gallery Channel, they've have a special on the newest working artists and they are very detailed. There's even been some shows on regional artists. It's all in hidef so you can really see the work in great detail.
there was a film about Brett Whiteley; various I suspect, that I have seen where he was shown painting. Huge pieces like "Alchemy". Really interesting. He was very open to the public watching him paint. But he was a bit of a "rockstar" of Australian Art I suspect.
The VOOM series is called "Art in Progress." Tomorrow morning there is an episode "Julie Speed: Queen of Her Room."
http://www.tfaoi.com/newsm1/n1m282.htm
Here is a link to Brett Whiteley
Alchemy
thought I should give you all that.
Ben, thanks for the link. For the sake of conversation I'd like to comment on three of Whiteley's works. "Alchemy" has major shortcoming in my book: its aesthetic confusion. A degree of ambiguity is essential to a composition, but in this work it goes too far. It scrambles the aesthetic mind, giving too much information, very much like the paintings of Hieronymus Bosch. On the other hand "Woman in Bath" is aesthetically powerful and orderly, perhaps excessively so for some. It orders the mind with its two broad compositional aspects:The grey background with its beautiful negative shape and the moving contents of the bathtub/shower. The water pouring from the shower is VERY effective, better than Hockney's swimming pool splash. "The Bush" is aesthetically organized in a way (large vertical sections) that permits me to study its "information." I really respond to its composition, not to mention the georgeous palette.
Whiteley's "Self portrait in the Studio" and "The Letter (to Anna)" suggest a debt to Matisse.
The only thing of Whiteley's I viscerally respond to is the self portrait after 3 glasses of wine, I really liked that one. I cannot really critique the rest, t'ain't an expertise of mine.
Miklos and I are talking to ourselves over on the thread I started on Hockney's exhibit of Mapplethorpe. (warning, warning, explicit, warning...) Among Mapplethorpe's exhibited work, selected by Hockney, are several photos of some artists of repute...
back with a link to the thread in a bit.
