To say there is a paucity of heroes in the field of contemporary representational art is an understatement. We often point to some as I have, like Hockney or Warhol for some refreshing insight . I think the root of the problem is that much of contemporary realism is, in my opinion, derivative and trite, no matter how skillfully it is done. However to mistake Hockney's crudeness for real artistic merit, in my opinion is wrong and misleading. The "flattening out" of form was copied from Asian art . European artists, especially the French in the mid to late 19th century were very much influenced by this. But Asian art of that era was not crude, it was highly refined, it is only the western interpretations that became crude.
I think your attempt to find your way defining your view of representational art is commendable. You show a wonderful and original design sense. However It seems to me you have jumped ahead a few steps without doing the basic ground work. You have to work on your basic skill, IE. working from life, monochromatic studies. etc. or your paintings will always look like they were rendered from photos.
I just posted a course of study in the Works in Progress thread for Cynthia Leininger called Jay-Wip. I think this would be of great benefit to you.
There are no real shortcuts to excellence.
|
Hybrid Mode
