Art and audiences

Recently I saw some paintings by this guy I know Aaron Coberly, who had a show at the Fountainhead Gallery on the top of Queen Anne. My old stomping grounds.

Here's a link:

http://www.fountainheadgallery.com/

They're really really good, really technically well done, very painterly.

And they bug me for some reason.

I think what gets me most of all is that he sold about 6 or 7 of them so he obviously has tapped in to a very lucrative market. He's getting $1000 dollars for each one of them (actually more like half of that after the gallery commission) and they're selling like hot cakes.

Deep down, I think what gets me the most is that it's a kind of art that I really don't like to do myself and I don't do myself, yet people love it. It's like he's connecting with the people around him better than I am.

A BIG part of the whole art biz I think is how well you connect with your audience, how well you understand the world around you and how well you interpret the world to the people all around you.

When I see art that isn't my art doing so well, it makes me wonder if I've gone down the right track, done the right things.

That's probably good, that kind of self-assessment, a way of constantly evaluating your efforts but it can be hard to carry off sometimes. It's very difficult to check out new art and be positive about it especially if you think it's better than yours. So a lot of artists don't check out new art and if they do, they always will criticize it. I have to watch that.

What's really difficult to take is seeing an artist going down the same path as you but unlike you, they have a show in a gallery (that you're attending), they're using your ideas (so you can't use them anymore without looking like a copy cat), and they're selling the art, they're a BIG HIT. That can be tuff. But that can't stop you from looking at the art and you gotta strive to look at it uncritically. Nonjudgementally (even though it hurts).

I think one thing to remember though is that there is a BUNCH of different audiences out there, I mean you can't throw a stick without hitting an audience that's different from the audience just down the street.

The problem is, some audiences spend more money than others.

Another thing to remember is, some audiences aren't audiences I necessarily want to connect with. There's a definite tendency with some people as they get older is to become more conservative, they pine for the days when art was art and you didn't have these namby pamby ABSTRACT artists who do things ANYBODY could do if they had the time or the inclination and what's the deal with that BLUE FACE on that perfectly attractive woman over there across the way there, against the wall, that painting with the videcassettes in the background?

People love the good old days and I think that makes certain art more attractive to them and certain other art unattractive.

But I guess I WOULD want to connect with one of these kind of people if I could. I think that if people could just open their eyes to old ideas (the basics) in new paintings (or any other art form) their appreciation of life all around them would improve, they would be more vital in their day to day existence.

But that's just my opinion.

I have to be happy for Aaron and his work and I yam I really yam.

Art and Control

This pic on the right here, probably that's the most people I've ever drawn. Probably close to 5000 people represented there in a little sketch.

Maybe it's the most people drawn per square inch, you never know.

Should contact the Guiness Book of World Records and let them know that probably that's the most people per square inch (PSI).

In other Art News

My friend Chris and I saw a modern dance performance the other night called The Invisibles and it was really good! It seemed to me that the choreographer (Jessica Jobaris) did an amazing job of keeping the thing intact, 90 minutes of dancing and runnning and falling and acting and all SORTS of things were going on and it still held up.

We didn’t really read up on it beforehand and so it wasn’t until afterwards that I realized (or remembered) that the characters were linked to real people. I don’t think that detracted from my enjoyment and in fact I think it sorta made it better for me, not to have the characters historical.

And to have it all work out like it did anyway is a real testimony to the fact that the dance connected to the audience big time, I really felt that everybody thoroughly enjoyed themselves.

My feeling is that the connection with the audience was on a deeper, subconscious level like an an archetypal level or somepin, causing certain reactions in people that sometimes weren’t understandable consciously. Jessica Jobaris mentioned in an article that people were laughing at parts that she thought were sad and I noticed things like that myself throughout the performance, and both Chris and I remarked after the show that we thought we were understanding a lot of it on a deeper level than our conscious mind, that certain things weren’t explainable if we had to talk about them, but that we understood them somehow.

It sort of seemed that at some point that the whole thing took on a life of it's own , something that the choreographer didn’t plan on necessarily but which was a good good thing.

I think if you’re an artist and this happens you gotta let it go and not get too worried about it, even though it sometimes can be tuff. A correlation in a way is when somebody paints a painting and people see all sorts of things in it that the artist didn’t intend. It’s easy to be miffed at that, to try to control the piece of art and their reaction, but it’s a smart artist (and a good one) who can overcome that feeling of wrongness and let the piece of art just be.

I've heard the comment many times from authors that their characters seemed to take over while they were writing a book, that they did things in the story that the author never intended them to do.

In the face of a piece of art taking on a life of it's own, if you can just let it go, let it be what it wants to be, I think that it means that you are operating correctly as an artist. You’re a conduit between the world and your audience, you open the pipes and whoosh it all comes flowing out, full of life. And not everybody can do that I think, but Jessica Jobaris surely did.

Anyway, it was great, and she definitely should keep on doing what she's doing.

Art and all aroundness

So I'm doing these big watercolors with words on them, with people's faces and then words coming off the top of their heads that somehow are a summation of their lives.

At least that's what I'm TRYING to do.

Anyhoo, as I sit there and think of things to say I worry that I'm not including everybody in the world, that somehow big sections of life and people are being ignored.

But on the other hand, how the h-e-double hockey sticks would I be able to include the entire world, it just isn't possible, is it?

When Julie and I were in Madrid a couple of years ago and we went to the Prado (which is the BEST museum, I really liked it), we saw the Diego Velaquez masterpiece, "Las Meninas"...here's a link http://silencio.weblog.com.pt/images/eyes/DiegoVelazquez-LasMeninas.GIF

It's a fantastic painting, really one of the best ever and the first thing I thought when I saw it was, "he did it, he painted the whole world."

That was weird and that thought quickly left me as I moved on to more important topics like where can a guy and a gal get a cerveza around here? (My spanish begins and ends with asking for a beer and then asking for another one, please).

But how eggs-actly did he paint the whole world and was that just some frazzled misfiring of my sorry synapses? I mean, if you look at the painting all you see are a painter and his subject matter, who seem to be a motley crew of kids, midgets and animals. I don't even usually like a painting or a novel (don't get me started) where the main character is a painter or an author.

Maybe it's the big space above the people that does it, with the one man halfway up the stairs. I don't know.

But I'm thinking that Deigo Velaquez didn't start out to paint the world, it just happened. In the same lesser way, I should not worry about it either and just do what seems right.

By the way, there's a big exhibit of Goya's work in New York going on now at the Frick that's gotten rave reviews. Here's the web site: http://www.frick.org/exhibitions/goya/index.htm

I checked quickly and didn't see the Black Paintings of Goya which if you do ever go to the Prado you should see. They would be hard to miss, but you never know.

I think the Frick show are paintings that Goya did late in life, and I think the Black Paintings are too so I would think they would be there. They are unbelievable, really something completely different than a lot of his early work.

Goya's very early work is turrible (I say that non-judgmentally) and relegated to an out of the way floor of the Prado -- if you wanted to like have a foot race in a museum or sompin like that, it would be a good place to do it. There ain't nobody there.

But then he hits his stride and does the Maya paintings which are great, that one about the Third of May and that one family portrait that's got to be one of the wackiest portraits ever done, it's AWESOME:
http://www.artchive.com/artchive/g/goya/goya_family.jpg

Then came the Black Paintings and hoo boy, he let's it all hang out:
http://www.artchive.com/artchive/g/goya/great_he-goat_dtl.jpg

I guess he painted the black paintings on the walls of his house, and later they removed them and gave them to the Prado.

Anyway, he's one of the best, I put him in the upper pantheon of painters:

1) Rembrandt
2) Goya
3) Arne Westerman
4) Michaelangelo
5)Velaquez
6)Rubens

Baseball. Hope springs eternal and it springs up in the spring as well, as every year me and everybody of my ilk think that their baseball team will be better than last year.

And it's no different for fans of the Mariners, even though last year's team was pretty pathetic really. It's like they all went out and had a big kegger before the year or something and then were all hungover all year.

They had guys like Boonie and Scott Spezio and really they were just terrible, I don't even want to think about it.

So let's just see how good we think they'll be this year.

Pitching: well, they got rid of Ryan Franklin so they are IMPROVED from the get go, he was a drag on the whole staff, doing his steroids and saying things like "No, I don't think I should miss my next start, I don't CARE if I gave up 7 runs in the first inning. I felt good after that!" That whole thing about not getting enuf run support was a Krop of Krap too, some pitcher just ain't deserving of runs, probably their bad Krap Karma.

They got rid of the pitching coach, whatshisname, which was a very good move too. That guy was turrible and he was a drag on the whole staff, what with his "psychology" and his need for the spotlight. What could you be possibly discussing with Felix Hernandez in the middle of one hitter? That he needs to work on his mechanics? Arg.

This year they got Rafael Chavez who was the pitching coach in the minors that everybody went to to fix what old whatshisname had messed up for them. So let's just hope Raffy can do it again and get guys like Pineiro and Meche back on track.

Catching: They got this guy from Japan who is destined to be called "Joe" because his last name is Johjima. The batting watch is out this spring as we are all watching how he's going to hit major league pitching. So far, it's 1 for 6 which HAS GOT TO GET BETTER!!! Just kidding, it's spring training. And so far in spring training, despite the best effforts of Raffy and Joe, the pitching has been AWFUL, so hopefully they can round up the cows from that stampede and put them in the ol' corral before the games start to count.

Broadcasting: Still got Rick Rizzs, he's still turrible. I think we have to be resigned to the fact that he's here for the duration and just live with it (if we can). It's not so much his play by play, it's his highly irritating discussions with "Val" and "Hendu" and his propensity to talk about the Bowling Extravaganza for Cancer that "Bone" put together last night and how much fun they all had. Also, he tends to drive everybody KER-AZY with his rosy outlook, his running up the flagpole of the talent of anybody who shows a smidgen of success, talking and talking and talking about their last game meanwhile they're giving up home run after home run until Rick is finally silent for an out or two before he gets some steam up again and watch out Clint Nageotte, because you can't do ANYTHING without Rick telling people how GREAT you are even if you and I and everybody else knows that there's going to be some ups and downs during a year and it's not all going to be a bed of daffodils.

I just hope Felix can rise above Rick who IS getting a little old, maybe thinking about retiring? ("Oh, no, I just love this game too much, they're going to have to pry the microphone out of my hands.") Sigh.

Let's see: First Base? Richie Sexson. Hope he does better this year, batting average wise. Second base? Jose Lopez. This guy is going to be great, probably the year after the Mariners trade him. Shortstop? Yuniesky Betancourt, who showed he was a good fielder and an improving hitter, he seemed to get a lot of hits with men on base. Third Base? Adrian Beltre, who I think will have a better year than last, and who has reported to camp 20 pounds lighter than last year, just like Boonie did at the start of spring training 2005. Uh oh. Left field? Uh, Raul Ibanez, the quiet guy who is just hoping that nobody finds out that he's not all that good either. Center field? Jeremy Reed who everybody is thinking is a lot better because the Red Sox wanted him in a trade, so we'll all be looking at him a leetle closer. Right field will be Ichiro, and I tell ya, he better have a better year than last year or people are gonna start talking. DH? The Bucky Jacobsen era is over, and now we're in the Carl Everett era. Not much change, probably.

All and all, I'd have to say that the getting rid of Ryan Franklin and Bryan Price will add 10 games on to their record last year. The addition of Raffy will add some more games and the pitching I think will be much better.

So I'm predicting that the Mariner's record this coming year will be 85-77.

That's a real stretch, but I do think that the Mariners have some good young talent and if a guy like Felix is really as good as everybody hopes, it could make a BIG difference. They need somebody like Jeremy Reed or Betancourt or Lopez to break out and they need Johjima or Rene Rivera to be really good.

All are GOOD possibilities of actually happening because hope does spring eternal in the springy spring, so I'm sticking by that prediction, 84 and 78.