BLOG • PAGE 8

Even though I classify my work here at Artwanted as 'Abstract,' I seldom work within the confines of true abstractionism. Artwanted merely does not give me the option of creating a new genre with which to classify myself. :)

A purely abstract work of art is without any pictorial/figurative reference point for the viewer. Think of late 40's and early 50's Jackson Pollack or later Rothko for examples of pure abstractionism. And for an artist who crossed from the purely abstract to the figurative during his career, look at some of Philip Guston's work. He had a great reputation as an abstract painter only to confound art critics and established audience alike with figurative work later in life. Of course, he didn't exactly move from abstract to photo-realism, but the shift was still quite profound.

So how would I classify my work, you ask? Like the abstractionists, I wish my work to capture the emotional 'moment,' but I do not limit myself to color and basic shape, as, for example, Rothko did. I will literally throw in the kitchen sink if it suits the piece I am working on. An individual's reality is full of memories, both real and idealized, abstract and pictorial, and so I cannot consciously limit my process to conform to a specific flavor of art, without sabotaging my own artistic vision.

One reason I draw more than paint is because with the pure speed of the process, coupled with the average size of my drawings, I am more likely to pull out 'something' of the hidden self. For this reason I look at my small drawings as fragments, small shards of that reclusive entity. You could say my work is an active attempt to know and understand that person who by the merest coincidence is also the artist. ;)

But I still haven't put a label on it, have I? Perhaps that is as it should be.

Addendum dated April 1, 2015: I have now been painting again almost exclusively for over a year and a half. I am still using the one-minute sketch and/or the magnetic sketchpad to come up with ideas. I have also used as inspiration some of my works on paper, both color and monochrome. I call them 'translations' since they are not usually identical replications. The origin process has not changed though the paintings are admittedly not as spontaneously realized as some of my drawings have been. Some might think that a plus. :)

Have you ever looked up the word 'art' in either a dictionary or on the Internet? I did recently and found that seeking such a definition can be quite mind-boggling. It seems that our peception of art, like art itself, is fluid. By giving it a solid finite definition we are, in a sense, casting it in bronze. It may be beautiful in that form, but it ceases to grow and evolve.

We can thank the Dadaists and the Surrealists for widening the concept of art with or without the capital A. And, as I recall, the Impressionists, as tame as they are perceived in the 21st Century, rocked the status quo of the art world when those artists began to show their 'outrageous' works in the salons of Paris.

I would suppose that every artist, good, bad or indifferent, has an 'idea' of what art is and thrives to fulfill that personal definition with the tools at his or her disposal. One thing I think we can all agree on is that art isn't all about perfecting technique. Technique without emotive substance may as well be wallpaper. And it isn't all about the concept either, I think. Some concepts make interesting bedfellows but only as intellectual one-night-stands. Their ideosyncracies, like a lisp or snoring, can become quite annoying and their lack of a broad vocabulary can make them appear quite dull or stupid upon multiple visitations.

When you find the time, go to your local art museum and see what 'passed' for art, then visit a couple of your local art galleries and see what 'passes' for art. It will be interesting, I think, to note the similarities AND the differences.

I have mentioned in my bio that a lot of my work is like automatic writing, but did you know that automatic drawing, a technique I use to access a lot of my visual imagery, was first developed by the surrealists? Automatic drawing was introduced by Andre Masson, but Miro, Dali, Jean Arp, and Andre Breton also indulged. Even Picasso got into the act in his later years. Many of Miro's paintings began as automatic drawings and were converted into paintings.

And like the surrealists, I use the illusionistic approach. By this I mean that I let lines move until they suggest something representational to me, then I develop the work based upon these 'suggestions.' Sometimes they suggest nothing representational. These remain pure abstractions.

You can put 'automatic drawing' into a search-engine and find out a lot more about this genre-style if you like. I find that you can develop a better understanding of where art is heading if you know where it's been. I found out a lot I didn't know and I'd been a practitioner for years. :)

The gel pen is relatively new to us. I'm thinking its been prevalent for around a decade plus now. It makes an ideal drawing medium as it is acid-free and extremely fade-resistant. Tests have been made under extreme heat-light conditions and it was unclear whether the ink changed or the paper deterioated. But the average estimate by testers is that it will last at least 100 years without noticeable fading.

I use gel pens exclusively now and have since the late nineties. I like the way I can achieve a layered look without a lot of effort. But not all gel pens are created equal. Some of them dry out quickly or the medium bunches up at the tip. Two pens I bought less than a month ago have had their balls disintegrate already. And cost per pen is no indicator of either longevity or worth as a drawing instrument.

So buying a gel pen is a lot like buying a good paintbrush---when you find a good one, you hate it when it wears out. :)

Now that I've gone "Premium," I am in the process of sub-catagorizing images as well as perusing my portfolios for suitable and, hopefully, entertaining pieces to upload.

I don't usually do 'requests' because of the nature of my creative process, but I hope that my work 'as is' will find a receptive audience. I like the fact that people from all over the globe will have an opportunity to see work that would, for the most part, languish in closeted portfolios if not for this venue.

Please feel free to e-mail me if you are interested in chatting about art or if you feel you have comments that are too long or might be deemed inappropriate for public viewing. I am attempting to break free of my usually reclusive nature and I find that an exchange of ideas, if literate and heartfelt, is a solid and welcome stepping stone to that end. ;) --Charles