What occupies the mind of a second generation artist? My son's musings have been leaving me in the dust of late. I, after all, was raised in an environment where realism was the art form that was respected and abstract was misunderstood, even scoffed at. Other than my own studies in college which hardly brushed up against the other forms of art, and the odd movie that may give a popular and easily digestible explanation to an art form (Mona Lisa Smiles), I have had little reason to explore these concepts at depth.
Until now.
Daniel has been exploring this realm with great zeal. Bringing home large canvases that he rolls out before Bryan and I has triggered many engaging discussions on the roll of art in the world (political and spiritual) in the upcoming decades. It is great to see your offspring, literally "springing off" of the foundation that you provided and leaving you standing in his creative wake.
It gives me new inspiration. And has also required me to brush up on the concepts of non realism. It would be impossible for us as parents to keep up with the discussions, otherwise.
Nothing like being left in the dust by your kid.
So, here is an excerpt of a recent post on Daniel's new blog. It is actually more than an excerpt but if you want to read the WHOLE thing you can go here. Otherwise you can read the section that I found most intriguing, below.
Excerpt of Discovering The Splatter Effect
...a friend of mine, who i will admit is a walking encyclopedia, that said "abstract expressionism is already done". Pollock came and went, the New York school happened and now we've seen it.
i see it differently.
if there is still a fire in an artist for a particular meaning, or technique, or image, or style then that form of art isn't done yet. artist's don't take dead art and reproduce it - true artists, at least (oooh, this is getting tricky), always have something new to explore, even if the particular idea was already visited. abstract expressionism, including work like Pollack's, started in the 50's yes, but those were just when the seeds of a postmodern, global, relative world were beginning to sprout. Pollack was before his time, obviously, but that begs the question, what do we paint now. i largely don't have a passion for creating the realistic - aside from it being my artist personality at the moment - because i don't see it as a relevant art form for the postmodern context. that's a big statement, i know, and i'm not trying to say that realism is dead. it's not; philisophically nor practically. but the current world is an abstract one, filled with relative meaning, perception, and cultural disconnects. it is an unequal world that cannot rely on absolute standards set by hierarchy we no longer put trust in. what was Pollock painting? fractals? nihilism? communism? postmodernism? i don't entirely know, but he was painting a feeling that spanned cultures, ideals, philosophies, and time periods. Rothko did this too, just in a different way. the inherent problem with realism is that you are depicting something, and depictions have roots - therein, boundaries - in what they are depicting. but the further you get into the abstract, the further you get from the realistically bounded and more to the fundamental: therein, commonality. Rothko spoke to me of great unity. Pollock spoke to me in a similar way. what i'm trying to do is restate that principle (those principles) in my own way and, on occasion, add archetypal characters as commentary on the direction and challenges of that unity.
why restate something?
because people don't get it yet.
there are still people stuck in an absolutist mindset because they're not willing, or too fearful, or so entrenched in their modern political worldview, to take a look around and see that things are becoming relative. a simple example is racism in America, which we should all know now is alive and well. it's not legislative, but socio-economic, and it's wrong. fixable? i have no idea. but raise awareness first, and then you may begin to see a solution arise from the discussion. another example is absolutism in North American Christianity, which i've visited and revisited so many times, simply because there's this deep part in me that says "it still matters today".
but it won't matter as long as Christian stay in their absolutist, American cultural bubble, trying to stay relative through very short, very bad bumper stickers and over-logicalized, literal sermons.
End of excerpt.
So... making a difference in our world as artists means putting some of our entrenched and comfortable notions aside and embracing growth.
isn't this what Micah meant when writing these words?...
O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.
And it makes me revisit my question a few weeks ago in this post. As artists, what legacy do we leave behind for future believers?
Leave a comment