Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
What art
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Message
Posted
It is hard to find a representational artist, who has not been influenced by the Impressionists, wether internally or not. But I paint what makes me happy - Simple! I also like to try different things, stained glass, pottery, sculpture, oils, watercolour, pastels, acrylic etc. To keep me on my toes I have a weekly class (currently online),where the tutor sets the challenge and usually lets her students pick the medium, she also shows us how other artists have approached the subject. The latest challenge is a night scene, not something that I have done before. I'm not sure if you can identify my paintings, by the style or not. Perhaps my portraits are recognisable, but the others???????
Edited
by Linda Wilson
Posted
I detest waffle also, so had to take a nosey and a chuckle at the website you quoted, Michael!
I like paintings for their visual appeal and nothing else really... I always despaired at school, studying art history, and argued with my teacher on many occasions as to why a painter was thinking anything at all when creating that famous work I had to write a whole essay on!
I must confess though that I don't rate the famous 'unmade bed' in any way artistic. Nor do I rate that musical piece that changes chord only once every whatever months/years/decades it changes. And I laughed at the muppet who spent squillions on the Banksy piece that shredded to bits when the hammer went down.
Each to their own opinion and taste.
Posted
I'm with you Helen. All that 'what-the-artist-was-thinking' nonsense is more a case of the Emperors new clothes. There is a difference of course to being inspired which is something entirely different.
It puts me in mind of an excellent surealist painter friend of mine, I won't name him as he is now frail and no longer painting - who is highly respected and has many followers. When he started painting he had no idea where he was going. Whenever asked what inspired him he would shrug his shoulders and say it just sort of came to me as I went along.
I have one of his works which features a boat - he started by just painting the boat and as the lighting seemed to come directly from above he put a light fitting above it and so he went on. As a result I have a wonderful painting of a boat beached on a wet shore inside a bay windowed room and lit by a modern downlighter. It's a magical painting which I shall always treasure.
Edited
by Michael Edwards
Posted
I don't go with what the artist was thinking also. As for myself, I am just happy when my paintings come out looking like what i had in mind.
But about what the artists was thinking: I once worked with a person who was also a prison visitor. She showed me a piece of ceramics of a prisoner she was counselling, where the glaze was all dark and patchy! She tried to tell me that he must have been depressed, very angry and in a dark place when he made the piece in question.
Now, down to earth as ever and having been through the root of the Adult College's pottery department and endured the disappointing outcomes of contaminated glazes, i offered my explanation that it was more probable that the glaze had been contaminated by other students pouring excess glazes back into the glaze buckets which didn't belong.
She thought a minutes or two and then finally said, "Oh i didn't think of that possibility at all!"
Edited
by Nerys B
Posted
And here, children, is the classic example of why sociology is a flawed science, if it's a science at all. It looks within, where speculation can run riot; it looks at society, or the sociologist's perception of society; and it clumsily kicks actual evidence out of the way of the amateurish theorizing.
And I hope a certain B.Sc (Sociology) of my acquaintance reads this - if she does .... that's you, that is!
Posted
When I left the RAF I stared working in mental health service, we often had painting groups and these were great fun.
Most of the people suffered from a long enduring illness, and were often psychotic, we had a social worker join us in one of the groups I was leading who was quite full of her self. At the end of the day as we were clearing up she approached me and said she was very concerned about a particular person , as they had used purple to paint the moon in a church and graveyard.
At the point I asked the person why he had painted the moon purple, his reply was cos I couldn’t get to the f———— yellow.
I never did try to explain to her that maybe better not jump to conclusions, another example of trying to interpret why someone paints something.
Posted
That made me chuckle, Paul. I have been following this but haven’t gathered my thoughts together sufficiently to post but I will look at the artybollocks thing. It does reminds me of a time when I belonged to a cooperative gallery. I was a mere craft worker making a living amongst mightier beings who had gone to art college. I could never get my head around the artists statements that were provided for exhibitions, just words with no sense to me. Some of the work was lovely though.
Posted
I think in art, you don't have to conform to boundaries, or do you, so if you want a purple moon, you should go ahead and do it. Artybollocks is delightful Katy, the words dance. As an amateur, I think if you just want to appreciate what's in front of you, that's fine, if you want to ask questions about what's in front of you, that's fine, art is whatever you want it to be, on whatever depth.
Posted
And here, children, is the classic example of why sociology is a flawed science, if it's a science at all. It looks within, where speculation can run riot; it looks at society, or the sociologist's perception of society; and it clumsily kicks actual evidence out of the way of the amateurish theorizing. And I hope a certain B.Sc (Sociology) of my acquaintance reads this - if she does .... that's you, that is!Sociology and psychology are exact sciences in that they measure results and record data about event a analyse trends. However individuals may be swayed by modernist psychoanalysts. When I studied these sciences, psychoanalysis was considered to be rubbish, just like astrology when compared to astronomy. These days however. People take degrees in psychoanalysis and professionals part with good money from the public purse to get reports from these charlatans! Here Enders my rant for the day.