a few words on my work

a few words on my own work.. lost in and drifting unrestricted in, with and as time and space, while at the same time being totally concrete, realistic and human, all too human... These images echo the great modern tradition that pictures or depicts motion, energy and flux. “Energy and motion made visible – memories arrested in space,” as Jackson Pollock said… My paintings .. they bring out one of the most startling things about visual art: the sense it is still in motion even when it has stopped; the feel of paint being liquid long after it has dried. It is as if art, religion/spirituality and all belief systems, philosophy and science – all human, socio-cultural practices and emotions, life, death, suffering, bliss, happiness and joy, come together in all these attempts to suspend moments of energy … the splashy, fluid, stilled moments they wanted to record.. exploration and dynamic expansion, the actual flux of the act of painting are represented, caught in the eternal moment, eternity, the universal, the reality of many universes (multiverses) are caught – the original, the initial, the first moment of Creation (caught in the Creation myth of Genesis), an endless big bang is caught in and outside time, both in time and space and at the same time transcending them - the eternal now moment of the mystics, all creatives, composers, artists, scientists,philosophers, where beauty or the ideal of beauty and truth are one, merely two sides of the same coin (viewed in terms of aesthetics or in terms of truth), although being absolutely concrete, in a certain place, a specific time and space, but going beyond all restrictions of time and space that human notions, concepts and ideas are limited by and imposed on all our perceptions, attitudes, behaviour and emotions, and in this sense transcends time and space, motion and energy are caught, while allowed to remain free and at the same time arrested and made visible. This is, sums up and represents my mind set, my frame of reference, my unlimited spirit, my life worlds, multiverses (or multi- dimensional universes), realities, my consciousness, the manner in which my mind and being function and exists and my life, both in this life and world and in the 'next' or all lives and worlds. I am my art, my art is me, I conceive her, give birth to her and educate her, often in an unfriendly, hostile, violent, one-dimensional, materialistic world.

why people have set expectations of artists and art

nice, surprising, shocking pictures, recognizable forms and famous names = art? or - why people have set, restricted expectations of art and artists, visual art and the genre of painting., Nice, surprising, shocking pictures, recognizable forms, well known names and famous artists make art - this statement includes most people's notion of Art, or at least express a) what they expect of 'art', and b) what they 'like'. What do people want from Art, what do they expect are to be (like), what do they expect art to do (for them) and why do they,continue, to be interested in and view visual art? How many viewers and 'amateurs' (lovers) of art and artists have any idea about these and other implicit assumptions they make and have about art? What to say, how many people and artists conceptualize and are clear about about these things? What are the factors that are involved when someone views a familiar work of art, the work of a painter that is familiar to them, a new work of art by such an artist and work by an artist they come across for the first time? Are similar expectations in play as when someone listens to a composer whose work they know? When they hear an unfamiliar p[ice by such a composer? When they hear the work of a composer they are not familiar with? One often hears some popular singer when talking about a new album saying this: my fans have set expectations of my singing and sometimes some of them do not like it when I attempt new explorations, new styles and other forms of music. Are similar sets of expectations involved in the case of the questions I wrote here about familiar and unfamiliar artists, familiar and unfamiliar art work? One could suggest that just as some people are more open minded and flexible in their everyday lives and probably have more complex, subtle and larger mind sets than others, in this way some people will have more subtle, larger and complex frames of reference and understanding when it comes to the arts, art, visual arts in particular and the painting genre of visual art. Why is it that many people like paintings that include representations of or hints to representations of and references to familiar objects such as people, especially bodies and faces of people, houses, animals, fauna, flora, etc? Does the inclusion of such familiar objects in a painting make viewers feel more comfortable? If this is the case then people do not wish to leave or be compelled to leave their comfort zone, the comfort zone of their everyday mind set and the frame of reference they employ (or are, what their beings are like) and they do not appreciate it when their ways of perception (of perceiving, interacting and dealing with things, external and internal) are challenged. Most people prefer that their mind sets, frame of reference and understanding and scheme (system or structures) of perception and experience are confirmed rather than being challenged. These are some of the reasons why new works of art, new artists, new styles and genres in visual art are, initially rejected. The same goes for other art forms, eg music, performance art, etc. On the other hand, producing 'works of art' merely to shock, catch the attention of or unsettle people (for example some of the work of Madonna, even her name referring to the 'mother of God", her welcoming of guests at the Tate or some other gallery by calling them 'motherfuckers",titles such as 'piss Christ', nudity, etc) or their mind sets, frames of reference, attitudes and values, are no guarantee that such things have any lasting and aesthetic value. Works of art may or may not cause such reactions, but such things are not the only or major raison d'etre or goal and purpose of a work of art. So what is the reasons for creating works of art? What are the goals and the purpose for creating such things and behind such actions? Why do some people find it necessary to create something that did not previously exist? What is the nature of, the reason for and the meaning of the process of creation, of creating something, anything, and more specifically for the creation of phenomena that constitute the visual arts and more specifically the painting genre of the visual arts? There are many reasons involved, for example to please a patron, financial reasons, a diversity of socio-cultural ones, psychological ones, etc. To explore these reasons one need to involve history of art and of ideas, socio-cultural and psychological and other factors that are involved in the production of art, visual arts and the visual art genre of painting. Such explorations might well reveal psychological patterns and types, social and cultural factors (for example non-conformists, outsiders, misfits, etc) that are visible among visual artists, especially painters. When studying such psychological patterns, ways of social interaction, types of roles employed to fit into society and produce and maintain realities or life worlds, one would have to develop a typology of artists. One typology could divide artists according to the degree in which they form part of the academic art (teaching and learning) of the day, the degree in which they or their work, form part of the aesthetic status quo, or the degree in which they differ from this status quo. Truly original (viewed in terms of technique, formal structures such as form, colour, composition, texture, media being employed, one or a few set, limited styles, or the constant production, changing of, developing, transformation and transcending of many styles) artists (as the one pole of a continuum of inventiveness or creativity) will most likely be seen to be more adventurous, explorative and endlessly changing than those on the opposite pole of the continuum, namely academic art, Sunday and tourist painters, etc (paint by numbers according to established, institutionalized attitudes, norms, leading aesthetic ideals, employing contemporary fashionable crazes and genres in the visual arts for example digital art, installations, the artist - his body, bodily fluids, actions, clothes, furniture, letters, photos - as art, etc. An illustration from popular music, think of the international craze of 'rap'). One must explore original and academic art and artists in the context of their own time, for example the different types of Modern (Pre WWII) and Contemporary (Post WWII) visual art and painting. The latter in turn should be divided into different periods, for example the early and later American Abstract Expressionists, Pop Art, and the many developments in painting since those periods. To summarize, an artist should be viewed in the context of his time and the specific periods in which he begins to create and develop. This is merely the 'external' socio-cultural context in which he works. Then one should explore the entire body of work of the artist so as to identify its 'internal' development and transformation. The latter is almost a comparison of the artist, or his work, with itself. It is possible to divide the work of some artists in distinct periods, while in the case of others one finds that there are no distinct periods but that the artist works in series. A series could be self-contained or develop from one or several series and be transformed into one or several series. A series could explore, investigate and analyse one, several or many things, for example colour, form, media, technique, composition, the degree of 'being off', unity or disunity, etc of a work. It will seen that the most original or 'creative' artists: work in series, and that their body of work consist of constant and large transformations, that they explore, reflect on, question, modify and develop things such as aesthetic notions, ideals, and other aspects of the visual genre of painting to a much greater extent than less original and less creative artists (for example those situated closer on the continuum of original and academic artists to the academic pole). A clarification - such reflection, exploration, investigation, analysis or "thinking", occurs mostly (not totally) on a pre- conceptual level or in the sub-conscious of the artist. Obviously the artist himself or others could eventually conceptualize these things, but when in the process of creating the artist's assessments, judgements, 'thinking', etc are pre-conceptual and sub-conscious, rather than totally rational and explicit. The 'intelligence' being employed could be referred to as aesthetic intelligence, in the same manner as one could refer to the informed skills (or intelligence) of a sportsman, such as a footballer, an athlete, a swimmer, etc. It is one thing to evaluate an artist or artists in terms of their degree of originality, but to assess their skills of draftmanship, execution of painting techniques, grasp of perspective, form, colours, composition, etc are totally different matters. 24/2/2015 ulrich

ART, Visual Art/s and Painting

ART, Visual Art/s and Painting A dictionary will give a number of meanings for the word ART, for example: a) paintings, drawings, etc b)the activity of painting, etc, c) paintings, drawing , etc as subjects of study, d) arts, subjects of study that are not scientific subjects, e) the arts, activities such as music, art, film, theatre and dance considered together, f) an activity that needs special skil or knowledge. Visual Arts, according to one dictionary, are types of art in which you make something for people to look at, for example painting, drawing and photography - compare performing arts. Painting, according to one dictionary, is a) a picture made using paint, b) the activity of using paint to create a picture, c) the activity of using paint to cover something. It is possible to quibble about the above, to provide other meanings of these words, to produce examples of other phenomena and activities not included in the above. One finds numerous examples of such thinghs in developments in Art, Visual Art/s and painting in the last and present century. The points I wish to explore here concern other issues and aspects of Art, the Visual Arts and Painting. I wish to ask questions concerning the social, the sociological, the psychological, the cultural and socio-cultural functions, factors, aspects, purposes, values, uses, meanings, etc of these three things. Let each of us ask ourselves - what do I understand by Art? by Visual Art? by painting? Would my responses be different depending on when (what age) I am asked these questions? Would the responses of more educated and less educated people differ? Would the responses of those who work in the arts and sciences, commerce, crafts, skills (skill such as carpentry, mechanics, engineering, etc), sports, etc different? Would the responses differ according to age groups, to the ethnicity, the culture, the country (of origin, upbringing) and the historical period in which individuals live? These questions should give us the insight that there is no one, absolute thing that is referred to by the words - Art, Visual Art and Painting. However, this is merely touching the surface, considering these things in general and from the outside in some kind of timeless, universal context, perspective and point of view. I wish to make these questions more personal by involving the values (in general and aesthetic ones in particular), the attitudes, the feelings, emotions, perceptions, mind sets, frames of reference and of understanding, interpretations, assumptions. suppositions, pre-suppositions, etc of every individual. What do I expect from Art, from Visual Arts and from Painting? What do I consider to be good, average or bad Art, Visual Art, Paintings? What are the norms and standards I employ to make these judgments? What are the things I employ to make sense, interpret, respond to, encounter, react to paintings in general or a specific painting? Am I aware of these rules and norms I employ? Are these norms objective, intersubjective, universal, personal, emotional? Where did I obtain them? Did I develop them myself, obtain them from professionals, by education, relatives? Do I consider the medium being used, the techniques, the process of painting, the structures (such as form, colours, composition, textures, etc), my emotional reaction to a painting? What do I want from, seek from and expect art and a painting to do, to be, to present or represent? Does it make a difference to my perception and judgement if I know the name of the painter? If the painter is unknown or a famous and established artist? Why are different prices placed on the work of different paintings? Are the paintings themselves being considered or the name of the artist, the price paid for his work, his fame, etc? Does the size of a work of art matters ? Do large paintings that I enter and become part of or small works that I treat as if they are objects, like a chair or table, I look AT make a difference how I react to and interpret a painting?

a few words on my own work

a few words on my own work.. These images echo the great modern tradition that pictures motion, energy and flux. “Energy and motion made visible – memories arrested in space,” as Jackson Pollock said… my paintings .. they bring out one of the most startling things about his art: the sense it is still in motion even when it has stopped; the feel of paint being liquid long after it has dried. It is as if art, religion/spirituality and all belief systes, philosophy and science – all human, socio-cultural practices come together in all these attempts to suspend moments of energy … the splashy, fluid, stilled moments they wanted to record.. exploration and dynamic expansion, the actual flux of the act of painting are represented, caught in the eternal moment, eternity, the universal, the reality of many universes (multiverses) are caught – the endless big bang is caught in and outside time, both in time and space and at the same time transcending them - the eternal now moment of the mystics, all creatives, commposers, artists, scientists, philosopjhers . transcending time and space ,,…. motion and energy are caught, arrested and made visible

more of my work - www.newstylesgallery.info

more of my work here - http://www.newstylesgallery.info

latest work - HERE - http://www.newstylesgallery.info/home/21feb2015