*nod to stephen hawking.
In furtherance of the voice of the artist discussion, I’m posting a painting by Richard Deibenkorn which is a landscape (part of the ocean park series) pushed just about as far as you can go before it completely dissolves into abstraction. Maybe some of you might not like this piece, some may have a negative response to it as a landscape but it’s a landscape, at least it refers vaguely to the lanscape. I’m a big fan of Mr. Deibenkorn and on a separate page (art history) I’ve posted 7 landscape paintings by various master artists that show the range of interpretation from straight forward realism to abstraction, 2 of the paintings are his.
The voice of the artist comes from three things: ability, vision, and, for lack of a better word, style. Ability comes from the 10,000 hours it takes to master a thing. Vision is the desire to have something to say that is unique (concept and content) and style is the combination of painting methodology, palette, shape, edge and level of interpretation. Vision and style evolve from the 10,000 hours it takes to figure out who and what we are. Where we all fall in this spectrum is, of course, up to us. When you look at the early works of most master artists you can see clear influence from others, it’s not until the time gets put in that the individual artists voice emerges. The thing I always find interesting is how an artist on one end of the spectrum can not accept and artist on the other, each is only a series of steps from the other. Check out the page called art history and see what you think.