The Centre of Art Criticism

Welcome, Ron Price. I hope we will have much opportunity to study and respond to your very interesting thoughts. I, for one, have backed away from the romantic emphasis on the artist as a charasmatic shaman of the aesthetic dimension. But I will need some time to properly understand your perspective. I suspect I'm reading too much into your present post. Moreover, I hope that on-going interaction will permit me to both refine my view of your perspective and my own. I studied painting in the era of Abstract Expressionism and have remained a follower of much of its general style (painterliness, sensuous use of paint, etc.), but I have rejected its exaggerated emphasis on expressiveness. This will require future qualification and development.
JLN

marking

Welcome to A2K RonPrice!
Are you a Baha'i?

Very interesting poem!

Ron, I didn't realize that was your poem. I thought that you were continuing your excerpt from Venturi. Will you clarify please?

I think he is absolutely right Ron.....without artists
or poets there would be no critics.....it's a parasitic relationship ! I am not so sure about Venturi's attitude to "the universal".

Ron, it seems to me that what Venturi says about the centrality of the personality of the poet is more true that it is for the artist (painter and sculptor). We painters have the task of creating something that is more external to us than is the poem of the poet. The painter creates an object; the poet writes symbols depicting their inner life. I think, as I suggested above, that the expressionist's claim to be ex-pressing their inner life, their emotions by means of paint, is a gross exaggeration. They are interacting with the paint to generate an object of art. No doubt in the earliest stages of a painting when intuition plays a more dominant role (especially for abstract art) there is more "expressiveness." But very shortly after that moment of greater abandon, concern for the over all aesthetic value of the painting takes over, and one moves from an impulsive phase to one that is more calculated, more oriented toward "problem solving" and principles of design (consciously or not). If anything, while working on a painting I come to have emotions evoked BY the painting as it develops. The arrow of causation points from the painting to me. I do not put emotions on the canvas; it puts emotions in me, just as it will possibly do for viewers when it is exhibited. This is not to claim, of course, that the painting paints itself (although sometimes this appears to be the case). The painter is clearly involved (boy, that's an understatement if there was one). The painter's aesthetic sensibilities clearly guide the painting's ultimate character, and sometimes emotional responses to the painting become motivational forces for what the painter does next. In other words, the process is best described as an interaction. Even months or years after the painting is finished the painter looks at it creatively, projecting into the work their own inner dispositions. This applies to everyone who sees it. To see and appreciate someone else's work is itself a creative act. Beauty is, at least in this sense, in the mind of the beholder.

By the way, I can think of an exception to what I have been saying. I've been talking to Shepaints at Abuzz about Hopper and his evident theme of loneliness in most of his paintings. Here is a likely example where the painter uses painting to express his inner life. But then Hopper is to my mind more of a poet than a painter. He's more concerned with meaning and emotion than he is with aesthetic form, color and the texture of paint. He's a visual poet.

Letty - I just assumed that it was his work, as it is sign at the bottom:
Ron Price
16 September 2000

and we are not on 2000, so I could be wrong on that.

JLN - you got me all confused about my work , most of my work is are created from my feelings - specially the negative ones - and still, I don't considered myself to be an expressionist - I guess I have to revise my concepts a bit closer.

And ... I wonder where is Ron? Couple of questions, several statements and no answer at all!

Hey, he's an Aussie, Rayvatrap. Probably out in the outback trying to attract a wombat.


http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=29180&highlight=

rayvatrap - no you aren't an expressionist, don't worry!

Expressionism is about the use of paint and marks not simply about the emotions etc that you are describing - if it was then Hopper would be an expressionist which he clearly is not.

The German expressionists used heightened colours and characteristic bold marks in dramatic images, colours were chosen for the moods and feelings they would evoke as were the way that marks were put down. That is a gross simplification of the ideas behind expressionism but you'd need to read up about it as I can't explain in a few words.

I think that artists make their work for a wide variety of reasons and one critic cannot state a formula that fits all - or even all the work of one artist. Critics also frequently read things into work that was never intended by the artist and what is read into work can change with fashion - I'm suspicious of many art critics!

Some artists work is very cerebral, mathematical, precise and others are emotional, expressive etc and they are all valid in their way. The same formula can't fit all.

Vivien - Thank you, I was starting to get worry for a moment there - though I was a lot more confuse about myself than I believed I was.

I do have to do some more reading on the topic it self, plus I have to get back to read about art as much as I use to do. Right now, I know nothing!

we're all learning rayvatrap - forever

I should do more reading as well. At the moment I aim to make more time for the painting now my course has finished and i have a little more time for myself.

It just occured to me that Hopper's depiction of loneliness may not EX-PRESS (bring out) actual feelings of loneliness. He probably was a lonely man, and this may have influence his choice of theme, but he may also have been DEPICTING his thoughts about loneliNESS. What do you think? Does expressionism refer to the depiction of ideas we have ABOUT emotions--they may be ours or others--or does expressionism EX-PRESS feelings felt at the moment of painting. I tend to see the latter in the works of "action painters" like deKooning, Kline and Pollock. This same question can be applied to the surrealists. Obviously they are painting about dreams, maybe even dreams they have had. But they certainly cannot paint while dreaming, so they are not EX-pressing their dreams, only depicting their recollection of them or ideas they have about the nature of dreams in general--like Dali's incongruencies.

Ron....I hope that when the artist takes up the paint to paint, (or sculpt or whatever); or when the poet puts some words together, he or she does
not start with....."This has to be of universal
significance"......To me universal significance is
only the serendipitous by-product of some deeply held personal conviction....

shepaints. Didn't you respond to my thread on, "I like your style, say, I think it's Marvelous"? I recall your having said, " shouldn't that be mahvelous."

Don't think the Ron of great price is coming back to explain.

Hebba, who I thought was a woman, was a fantastic sculptor. He comes and goes like your typical Brit turned Dane.

mahvelous to meet you again, Letty!

Here's how I picture you, shepaints. A woman who has a stained smock, waving a camel's hair brush, and living in a garret somewhere in the glitter dome. Flaming red hair, muralist, critic, and creator.

Wonderful image Letty. but in reality I live in the country outside Hollywood North (Toronto). Yesterday while painting in the garden (moving a bright red sable brush quickly across a canvas), my 9 week old kitten took a few swipes at it and ended up with emerald green paws....

Nobody, I agree with your thoughts on depiction versus expression. Hopper is primarily like a director on a stage set, using the content ( images of people or buildings in certain situations) to express his thoughts on the human condition. In some of his works it seems like he is moving towards a more physical expression of emotion with the paint...(those dark woods!).

For the expressionists and action painters, beyond the content, the paint quality itself appears to be a physical, almost cathartic, manifestation of emotion.

Yes, they are somewhat like the method actors, drawing on their inner life to create the actions and feelings of a role character. The difference lies in the fact that the method actors are USING their inner life to create an illusion, a depiction or portrayal of a character. The action painters claimed to be actually extrojecting their emotions onto the canvas. Supposedly, what you see is the embodiment of their feelings at the time of painting.

(Edited 7-24-04)