Today I went to see the Richard Diebenkorn, The Berkeley Years 1953 - 1966 at The De Young Museum. Many of the later works of this period, both drawings and paintings, showed his process clearly in that one can see where he first sketched or painted something, then changed his mind and painted or sketched over the previous lines and/or patches of color. There were large areas in the paintings which had been painted a dark color, then painted over with a lighter color which didn't cover the original; there were lines in the drawings which clearly showed an arm or leg or whatever had been drawn in one position, then partly erased when a new position was drawn in. The commentary with some of these stated that this "technique" added a feeling a motion to the drawings or paintings. Possibly, but to me it mostly looked sloppy! If it weren't Diebenkorn, would anyone believe it's art? Or at least, serious art? While Diebenkorn was an accomplished and traditionally trained artist, why are his "stream of consciousness" works (my words), which to me look like studies from a sketchbook, hailed as great, groundbreaking art? Can anyone create directly on canvas or paper, dripping ink or paint, sloppily painting over our mistakes or partially rubbing out the charcoal lines we don't like, and be hailed as geniuses? Maybe the question really is - should anyone who does this be so celebrated?
|
AuthorThis blog will express whatever burning thoughts, ideas, insights, etc that come to me regarding art, creativity, and just life in general Archives
October 2013
Categories
All
|