I've these really neat conversations with my instructor at the art studio that I go to. She likes to dive into philosophy when explaining approaches to art, and what can be more interesting than that :) We have had many such conversations, I'll some day write on the others, which were equally interesting, but let me elaborate on the latest one which left me thinking for a while.
So, few days ago we were talking about a new piece I'm working on. I told her I know exactly how I would go about doing this, and I don't want to do it that way. I've this concept, which now in hindsight doesn't seem all that right, of not doing the the same thing again. By that I mean that, if I do use a certain idea and style I use it once for a piece, I don't go about exploiting it as such. My intent is to keep things dynamic, and to venture into as many things that I can(perhaps to learn more?).
But people like to make a series of paintings on a idea that they have, and they use a similar style for all of those. So you get a nice set of pieces that go very well with each other, and form what is called, a 'body of work'. This is what most artists seem to be doing, and that is how someone gets interested in their work. It's like Hitchcock making a series of suspense thrillers.
So, what she was trying to imply is that, dynamic ideas are good, but the dynamism should be paced out. In other words, she was implying that innovation is not always a good thing. If we innovate something, and keep working on that idea, we refine it and make it more sophisticated. And that makes for good art, which is appreciated and understood.
To conclude, innovation should be accompanied by refinement. And refinement reaches a stage where we call it 'art'.
Talk about refinement, here's a Hyundai commercial for that. Needless to say I really dig what this company is upto.
So, few days ago we were talking about a new piece I'm working on. I told her I know exactly how I would go about doing this, and I don't want to do it that way. I've this concept, which now in hindsight doesn't seem all that right, of not doing the the same thing again. By that I mean that, if I do use a certain idea and style I use it once for a piece, I don't go about exploiting it as such. My intent is to keep things dynamic, and to venture into as many things that I can(perhaps to learn more?).
But people like to make a series of paintings on a idea that they have, and they use a similar style for all of those. So you get a nice set of pieces that go very well with each other, and form what is called, a 'body of work'. This is what most artists seem to be doing, and that is how someone gets interested in their work. It's like Hitchcock making a series of suspense thrillers.
So, what she was trying to imply is that, dynamic ideas are good, but the dynamism should be paced out. In other words, she was implying that innovation is not always a good thing. If we innovate something, and keep working on that idea, we refine it and make it more sophisticated. And that makes for good art, which is appreciated and understood.
To conclude, innovation should be accompanied by refinement. And refinement reaches a stage where we call it 'art'.
Talk about refinement, here's a Hyundai commercial for that. Needless to say I really dig what this company is upto.
2 comments:
I have always interpreted sophisticated as complicated. And complicated things are difficult to understand, right?
Last week I was going through your uploads on the paintings blog, nice creations. I liked the Krishna one the most so far.
Thanks Sudeep.
Sophisticated doesn't have to be complicated in my opinion, it is refined, more evolved. So it can actually be simpler and easier to interpret.
Post a Comment