View Full Version : Passion
Great artists decribing their work always mention the passion and emotions, feelings etc that went into the painting. Does this mean that if you are a very practical type that doesn't show a lot of emotion you could never paint a masterpiece?
What do you think,
10-15-1999, 05:42 AM
The value of a picture is never in the rhetoric of the painter. Be wary of vague terms like 'passion' and 'emotion' when they are used to describe artwork, or 'passionate' and 'emotional' when describing artists. I've read a lot of artist's statements and rarely do not find the liberal use of meaningless terms like these. But this is good for business, I think. Customers expect to hear about 'passion' and 'emotion'. It's part of what they pay for. If you are a genius of marketing, perhaps you can sell yourself as introverted, aloof, or dispassionate (as there is nothing inherent in any of these qualities that prohibits the creation of great art.)
My point, I think, is that buzz words like 'passion' and 'emotion' are part of the packaging that is expected from an artist. They are important to the consumer. Nothing more. Rhetoric and the image of the 'passionate artist' sold pictures in the 16th century and it still does today.
10-15-1999, 06:30 AM
MCKEE,,,,then what goes into your artwork?,,,,logic and theory?,,,milt
"he who thinks he know all and knows nothing is king in a kingdom of one,,,,,or a critic" - the kobe
10-16-1999, 12:25 AM
What Rod had put forward was the way artists describe themselves and their work, using terms like 'passion' and 'emotion'. I suggested that these words are used because they have come to be expected. I can't recall in my reply saying anything about passion and emotion not being part of the creative process (although they don't have to be.) I was merely pointing out the excessive use and vagueness of these particular words.
But I don't understand holding logic against passion. A person can be passionate about logic. And theory...? Every picture I paint is theory. I'm not in any way privy to the Truth.
10-16-1999, 04:25 AM
I think the creative process has, de facto, at least some level of emotion and passion. So for any artist NOT to include these words in his self description is impossible,,, from the weekend painter who loves to paint to the seasoned professional. I have specific tastes in art, but I will grant even the biggest bullshitters in soho that they have passion and emotion about what to do if they show a smidgeon of creativity. I'll hold myself back, and not say who has more or less passion and emotion than the other, though. That's being a little too pompous,,,and I can be a pompous guy.....milt
10-16-1999, 05:01 AM
Raphael painted how many - 600 Blessed Virgins? Many are considered among the greatest works of Western Art; not all of them, certainly, but I don't imagine that any of them, not even those among his early works, could be deprived of the label, Art. Surely Raphael was not passionate toward each of these? What he was passionate about, in many of these cases, I imagine, was the lifestyle he was leading and in order to continue living this lifestyle he needed cash, he needed commissions.
I believe that a lack of passion in a painting very often cannot be identified. What painter hasn't had the experience where a particular picture of his or hers is singled out by viewer after viewer... a pot-boiler that the painter recalls full well was painted with very little thought or feeling behind it?
I have this one awful little picture that I painted at a time when I was simply cranking them out to fill wall space. It is absolutely horrible... perhaps I feel this way because I know there was not one drop of passion behind it... but everyone who has seen this picture loves it. People see it and they pull it aside from the others. Now, they can't all be idiots. They are seeing something in that picture that I did not put there. And at the same time, many pictures that I painted passionately are now gathering dust.
I think very often a passionate viewer is enough.
10-16-1999, 11:39 AM
I agree on the viewer thing. Because I believe that the feelings (or lack of) put into the art by the artist is enjoyed during and after only by the artist himself. Once it is viewed by someone else, the feelings (or lack of) about the art are that of the viewer and will be different for everyone.
vBulletin® v3.5.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.