View Full Version : Here's something

Pete Hubbard
06-07-2003, 07:32 PM
One of the things Iím thinking about is isolating the creative kernel. An artist looking at a painting sees all the arrayed components of the piece. If the painter selects one aspect of the painting and changes it he can see the results from that change. Thus getting some insight into the creative act. Then he can change another element and see what else happens. Each step of the way he learns something new about the essence of creating. This is how I think of painting, a continual exploration. Every time I change something I want to explore the results, understand the implications. Then when I have exhausted that vein I try another one. In this way painting is as much a science as an art.

This is called the scientific method. The question is: when confronted by a phenomenon, what is the cause? The method is to identify all of the components and then change each component one at a time and see the results. Thus learning the roll each component plays. One by one each component is identified and what its roll is in the total outcome. And it can be determined if that component is critical to the outcome or is superfluous thus making it possible to eliminate all unnecessary elements until what remains is the crucial and irreducible kernel of art.

The only part that is what would be called conventional painting is what happens from my shoulder to the tip of the brush. From my shoulder up is all left brain, from my shoulder down is right brain. Thus I can apply both sides of my brain simultaneously.

From my shoulder down its all touchy feely, that is right brain. Essentially barely controlled scribbling. From my shoulder up its all left brain, analysis. I think of it as something like a fire hose. Iím objectively thinking where I want to direct the paint, as I would a fire hose. But I have only minimal control over what happens once my arm starts moving. What this does is allow the paint to do what it does best, be paint. I just get out of the way and the paint will do the rest.

The human mind is not all its cracked up to be. Paint is much better at being paint then the human mind is. Itís the old case of maximizing the medium. The human mind can add 2 and 2. Paint can be paint. Let each do its own.

This would seem to contradict my earlier point, i.e. the scientific method, but its only assigning to those that which compliment their strengths. The line of demarcation is the shoulder.

06-08-2003, 09:27 AM
I don't know, Pete.
Taking a gander at your web site, it's about as linear/right-brain/head-to-shoulder as you can get.

I'd say, from the shoulder up is winning hands down.:rolleyes:

Pete Hubbard
06-08-2003, 10:20 AM
Hmm, I would take that to mean my intent works. I say that because my drawing really is very anemic, that is I couldnít draw/render my way out of a paper bag. Really, I canít. When I was in drawing class in school we would have to draw a still life or something. The assignment was to draw it as faithfully as we could. I just couldnít get into it. I ended up doodling in the margins like it was a math or English class. If I could just let loose and draw with abandon I was fine. I eventually learned to work with that, (my fire hose analogy) but to this day all I can draw are stick figures and scribbles. Iíve since learned that drawing is more then just rendering. In fact rendering is just a small part of drawing. But thatís another subject.

A typical drawing from life drawing:

06-08-2003, 10:51 AM
Ya know, Pete, this drawing is really quite superb.
Won't belabor all the technical/design principles/aesthetic attributes (they don't like that down here) but this example in many ways illustrates "a good drawing".


06-08-2003, 11:10 AM
so hospital room sterile
it is lifeless and cold

Pete Hubbard
06-08-2003, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by mame
Ya know, Pete, this drawing is really quite superb.
Won't belabor all the technical/design principles/aesthetic attributes (they don't like that down here) but this example in many ways illustrates "a good drawing".

I should have made clear that your remarks are appreciated, thank you. But I didn't mean to imply that it wasn't a good drawing. I wouldn't have posted it if I thought it wasn't.

Be that as it may I'll take your comments as positive support in whatever form they take. Thank you again.