My argument would be that if you take Mucha - who was graphical but not too fantastic - and subtract Klimt - who was pretty much faces with impressionism - you'd get Parrish, who was actually largely realistic if overly vivid. I think that's most peoples' beef with Parrish; he drew actual scenes as opposed to faces with some other stuff around them. Me? I dig Parrish.
What would be your opinion on this? In all honesty, missing ropes and background audience aside, I like the sketch more than I like the actual painting. There's something about the black and white making the two clashing figures seem that much more dramatic, more desperate.
I mean it's honestly pretty awesome just looking at it as an image and being unaware of things I sometimes take into account such as medium. But weighing that kind of thing at all seems to create opinions that I feel are nuanced but are obnoxious at best when I fail to carefully unload my pretentions to someone who doesn't have time for that bullshit. I'll mention that I've done sketches that were much more satisfying than the final product. It sucks. It's cool that you even notice the distinction. I think every artist would know what it's like to accept a level of failure that occurs frequently. But I've said things like that before to people who get hung up on the word failure. But words mean different things to different people at different times even. Imma just go get drunk and read Wittgenstein. (Not really.)
Since I have you, let me ask your opinion on something else. I was watching a documentary the other month, about a guy making paintings that eventually auctioned off for literally hundreds of thousands of dollars. One of the things that stuck with me though, was that he wasn't the only one making the paintings. His studio had a couple dozen assistants helping him make the backgrounds, touching up the colors, doing the super fine detail work, etc. Yet he's the only one who gets to sign the pieces. Money aside, cause I don't know how much he paid his assistants, I found it kind of unfair that the other people who worked on the pieces didn't get to put their stamps on it. I know the artist is the one with the overall vision and I know this is actually pretty standard practice, but it still stuck with me. Your thoughts?
Well it was very common when art was a trade for a master to apprentice someone. And the master might not do much of anything in the end. There are paintings that are important because Leonardo probably painted part of them but received no credit because he was under tutelage. So I can keep a thing like that in mind while being pissed off by that kind of thing being done today. Damien Hirst might be the most powerful working artist today. Because reasons. But he does that shit. And he can't even authenticate works of art assigned to him. He can literally not be able to tell if he did something himself or if it was done in his studio or if it was done by a ten year old with a spin art maker. I hate the limey fuck. That's a very extreme example that I refer to a lot because of the different levels of absurdity that should be apparent. In less stupid examples I guess I think of it more like an ethics issue. Art is subjective so if that thing bothers you like it does me then that is a valid opinion even if it just seems weird and you can't diagnose the problem like I can. But people also just want a thing to put on the wall and that's fine too I guess even if I think that makes them morons. But someone could appreciate something I do for reasons I could even be offended by for whatever reason that's probably a personal failure by myself in execution or expectation. I'm pretty well aware at this point exactly how much art school is a joke. The state of Georgia mildly endorses the fact that I'm an artist through giving me a BFA but I didn’t learn anything that was so critical that it separates me from some grandma painting roses on the weekend. I'm just saying that success in art is not very logical in the way it can be granted. It can be a humbling reality and the number of obnoxious art people I've met would do well to take it down a few pegs and realize how unimportant they are and the same thing for what they do. I feel like I obscured the line between cynicism and pragmatism there but I'm not bitter about a whole lot of art things
Honestly? I don't like it myself. Movies, for example, have five to ten minutes of rolling credits for everyone from the directors and actors to the caterers and chauffeurs. I think if someone is part of a project, credit should be given where credit is due. Plus, it'd add another layer to keeping track of the whole trajectory of someone's creative career. I also think you're not giving yourself enough credit here. Seriously. I bet there's actually an ass-ton of stuff that you've learned in art school that a laymen wouldn't learn on their own unless they're on some kind of autodidactic spree. Shoot, just the other day I was watching a few YouTube videos on cinema and color theory and each five to ten minute video was like a mini-revelation. The foundation of knowledge you have is important as shit and by knowing it and exercising it, you're an active participant in keeping it alive.
It took a while for my girlfriend to understand that if I am not happy with something I've made it's not a self esteem issue or I don't think I'm talented and that kind of reaction seems common. I've taught myself a ton of stuff that I didn't learn in school. And I learned a lot there and had experience people will never have the opportunity to be part of. Do you know what a cupola is? In the foundry world? Because the meaning of the word foundry is lost on a lot of people, let alone that it was once an important industry in this country. I can talk shop about melting metal and it's amazing that this suburban white boy can have a valid opinion about the field or that I've been close enough to molten iron to cinge my eyelashes. That's a lot to unpack and it's a consideration I give to a lot of what I do. Even in things like being paid to pick up dog shit like I am right now. I don't know. I think I'm very grounded in a lot of ways. More so than many people in my opinion