Outsider Art is In - What do you think of it?

The basic difference to me is that art naif is painting in the manner of the primitive painters like Henri Rosseau. Art brut is very much like the New York graffiti/cartoon art genre more influenced by Duchamp and Dubuffet (who coined the term). It's roots are collectors who were interested in the art of the psychotic. Most of the naive art is quaint and charming -- more decorative than anything else. Art brut is raw, explosive and from the gut (or gutter!) The similarity is in the technique, appearing untrained and elemental -- very cartoonish, if you will. Many art brut artists are trained -- all naive painters are trained (otherwise they would be referred to as primitive artists). What's you're bent, JL?

BTW, Welcome to Able2Know, JL!

JL love it that you are here. By the way I have decided to follow my bliss, i.e., it is going to be full time art for me from this day forward.

Hello Everyone,
Thank you for including me on this site and starting a thread close to my heart. Outsider Magazine is published 3 times a year by Intuit: The Center for Intuitive and Outsider Art. It is located in Chicago. The website is www.art.org As some of you know, I teach creative arts to adults with developmental disabilities. We are very much part of the Outsider venue, unschooled and from a place deep in the hearts and minds of very special people. Cobalt thanks so much for the links. They will be very helpful in pursuading my powers that be that what I'm doing is important for the artists and not just recreation time. As I work with the artists, I find that they all have their own way of creating, a personal technique and system. We use primary colors only, but some mix their colors and others don't. Most of the artists are non-verbal so finding out what motivates them is a challenge. I never know what is going to appear on the paper, but it is always a discovery.

Wow kayla, great site and I book marked it. Welome to A2k.

art
My "bent," if I understand you LightWizard is clearly away from naive art as you describe it. Grandma Moses does nothing for me. I much prefer art brut. I would include in this category the COBRA movement, especially Karel Appel. But I do not enjoy Baselitz or Dubuffet for the most part. I like very much the brutish aspects of Tamayo and deKooning. I do not like Outsider Art simply because it is done by "handicapped" people. I like it because it is, WHEN it is, expressive and exciting. Indeed, I am repelled by the very idea of the art of a category of people, whether they be "Indians," "Chicanos," "psychotics," "politicians" or popular music singers. Good work is good work. I wonder if--and Kayla, the specialist in this area might answer this--anyone, even a so-called normal person who has developed technical skills, can "let go" and do "outsider" art. In other words, can one tap into a primitive level of their being and pour out brut art? Or is there a line that once passed cannot be unpassed.

An interesting question. Perhaps if I did an experiment that enabled me to go into a semi-sensory deprevation state, I could find a different frame of reference for art. Then I might be able to cross over to a place that is void of sophistication and rules. Each of my students have his or her own set of rules. They have very distinctive styles. To get them to change or experiment with new styles is tedious and defeating. Their art empowers them. It states who they are. They paint with such intensity and passion, not caring if the work is shown or sold. Excuse the phrase, but they are in the moment. It is something I envy and cherish.

Interesting kayla, I love the idea of the art each person creates is who they are.

About 2 years ago, I was fortunate enough to be in an art class with an 82 year old woman who created the most unbelievable paintings. The class was a critique class so no instruction was given. Amen to that. This woman would show up with paintings of landscapes, people, flowers, animals, etc that were totally off the wall. The horse would be as big as the tree. The flower as big as the house or bigger. It was untrained, but not juvenile. There was something compelling about her work, a rare talent showed through. I told her she could show at my gallery anytime she wanted, but she said she just painted for fun and didn't want "nobody talkin' about my stuff." What a gal! I don't know if her work would be considered "outsider" or not, but it was amazing.

Wonderful story creating art just because she wants to and not having any ego that is what I do create for myself, I get completely into it when I am painting unaware of the passage of time and noise. I have been painting for four years now, I am 56, I do however get frustrated when I cannot put down what I see in my minds eye because of lack of knowledge about technique so I am going to take classes starting in January. One of the strangest things that happens when I am painting is that I start out with an idea of what I want to do and then it changes, not always but sometimes, as I go along and before you know it I have something so different I am even surprised at what results. Those are my best I guess I get so into it I let what ever take over and the what ever is the better artist.

Kayla - glad to see you *here*! Hadn't seen you since an artstudio or somesuch thread on abuzz from 400-something...

To all:
I can attest that Joanne's work is delightful! In a way, I hate to see her take classes, for having an instinctive outlook is so precious as an artist. Joanne is one I'd never say is "naif" and she makes choices that are very instinctual and emotion-driven. This appeals to me greatly, for my own work is more on the 'conceptual' side. I constantly battle in my mind for what my instinct is over what my mind says. JL, GW, and all: if anyone has "training" such as "education" in the visual arts, I would be interested in continuing such a discussion.

I believe there is a way to split this present discussion into one that continues on Outsider Art and then, separately one that will continue on on a topic like "Outside Art? The Roles of Instinct and Formal Training". I'd like to ask Jespah and Lightwizard to take on the task of creating the split in the topic - thanks,

cobalt

Would we head up the split topic as Primitive and Naif Art? Primitive is actually the term used to identify artists who are not trained. Naif identifies artists who are trained but choose to paint in a childlike style such as Michel Delacroix.

I think my painting is more waif by nature but then if naif means childlike I am that too.

My earlier question regarding the potential of trained artists to "tap into a primitive level of their being and pour out brut art...." referred, I guess, to the capacity to unlearn rules (or to be free to follow different rules: remember, Kayla's students with "developmental difficulties" are following rules at some level, which is why they like some work they do and not other work). I've referred elsewhere to the two stages of art production suggested by Nietzsche: the dionysian and apollinian. The first refers to the passion-driven ability to express oneself uncensorially, with total freedom; the second to apply principles rationally to arrive at consensually valid aesthetic results. I like to follow this pattern when possible, even if I have to honor Bacchus in the process. I see this process as moving from the level of Kayla's students to that of trained artists. But can one go back again? After my initial dionysian plunge into a work--and sometimes it starts in a conscious (apollinian) fashion, trying to achieve a preconceived end, and then it goes through the accidental and serendipidous changes described by Joanne above--and then follows weeks or months of altering this or adding that or erasing those until I arrive at something that is aesthetically acceptable. What I need to experiment with is the attempt to descend/ascend from that second apollinian condition to the dionysian one again. Maybe to go back and forth repeatedly. This dionysian process is what I seem to see in outsider art. Any comments?

But isn't there always a frame of reference? There is that moment when you step back and look at the thing. Judgement! I tried an experiment tonight, just putting tiny drops of paint on the canvas, trying not to think about how the the drops were relating to one another. I flopped. I kept looking at it and thinking that this dot didn't correspond with the other. I kept judging the damn drops! The rules wouldn't go away. Tomorrow night I'm going to attempt to this task again, without music and just a bit of light. If that doesn't work, I'll switch hands.

outsider art
How exciting, Kayla. Keep us informed. Much of the experience may be too subtle to describe, but not all of it.

outsider art
Kayla, I agree that there is always some kind of "frame of reference." But it can be an emerging and shifting frame, can't it? If it is too fixed, the artist is deprived of the continuously adaptive flexibility needed to grasp new opportunities and benefit from accidents as the work evolves.

Oh I agree. That's all part of the process. In my situation, I was taught most of the rules, an external influence. As for my students, most of the"rules" they are encountering are coming from personal experience while doing, internal influence. Yesterday I had all my classes draw themselves. The results, as you can imagine, were dramatic. I didn't set down all the rules for drawing a face. I just said draw yourself. Next week I plan to give them a brief lesson on how you normally draw a face re proportions and have them do the excercise again. The results should be interesting. My guess is that they'll just do what they want to do and ignore the "rules." As an artist, I'm constantly trying to get back to where they are. I need to be more internally influenced and allow my experiences to govern my execution rather than those rules I was taught so long ago. Why not put the eyes up in the forehead? Yesterday I asked the students why they did art. The number one answer was "because it feels good." Works for me.

"Because it feels good".I like that.
I "do art" because I´m very very restless otherwise.
It doesn´t just feel good kayla,it´s necessary.

outsider art
Hebba, to avoid restlessness--good insight. Someone once told me that for him masturbation was a "depression avoidance mechanism.," ike the constant need for music whether classical or rap. If it works, do it. I rarely feel depressed, almost never. Yet I always like classical musical music in the background and.......
Kayla, what a wonderful opportunity you have to learn about art-making from your students. Now I know another reason Picasso would not have hestitated to place eyes on a forehead, or virtually anywhere else. You know, it seems that we are always our own teachers. We ARE always learning from others (I feel a strong blast of influence from Hoffman after seeing the exhibit of some of his Berkeley pieces couple of weeks ago), but it is ALWAYS a matter of learning by discovery. Art is SO hands-on. Our ideas of what to do are SO secondary to what is learned WHEN we actually try to execute them. It's like they say about zen buddhism. One learns ONLY from "practice" (mainly meditation) not from lectures or from books
ANYBODY?