Dead and dying flowers

Having made my last post, the doubts began. The voice from behind asked ‘Are you sure?’, in particular with the notion that doing and thinking are one. I came to that conclusion from the point of view of a materialist. If there is nothing but matter, then thoughts, ideas, concepts, are material objects; thinking then becomes a a matter of moving and changing relationships between objects – words, numbers, symbols, marks. The distinction between conceptually based, and ‘skill’ based disciplines dissolves. The notion that there are skills becomes redundant. Techniques can be more or less skilfully applied. That was where I felt that the conceptual-skill dichotomy relied on a mistaken use of the notion of skill. Technique remains as the means whereby subject matter is probed in search of whatever …

I painted the pink bird (a little hard to see now it’s posted) out of a feeling that the flatness and tonal closeness to the background colour connected to the ‘deadness’of the bird. The yellowish line dropping from the top of the picture was intended to reach (out to?) the bird, but in painting it I arrived at a point where tension was created in the space in the centre. This subjective experience of tension was the surprise product of a technical process.

I’ve been thinking about Jon Bowen’s letter in a-n magazine.

And sitting on this for days.

Making money is not sufficient cause for making art.

All materials are equal.

A cardboard box can equal a tube of paint.

Art is a product of technical process.

Art is a product of intellectual process.

Technical process and intellectual process constitute thought.

The distinction between technical and intellectual process is false.

‘Skill’ is an honorific term.

‘Skill’ is the form of intelligent reflective (reflexive?) action.

‘Skills’ are not discrete entities.

It is impossible to talk about skills as discrete entities.

‘Skills’ cannot be taught.

Techniques can be taught.

All disciplines are conceptually generated and technically realised.

The distinction between ‘conceptual’ and ‘skill’ based disciplines is false.

The distinction between conceptual and intellectual, technique and skill is false.

Forms are their content(s); form and content occur simultaneously.

The appropriation of technical process is a political act.

The proper response to an artwork is another artwork.

Teachers and lecturers are powerful people.

Teaching and lecturing (might) encourage pursuit of power.

Most artists disappear.

Many ‘artists’ live in a state of nostalgia.

Bad art is better than mindless art.

£50 is money misused for a dashed off seaside.

Occasionally I get to a position where I am drained. Motivation is limited. Sometimes it is simply tiredness. Or the imagination dries up. That itchy feeling in the fingertips that signifies a need to work subsides. This week I made myself draw. I have a thrush which will not last much longer. My mind goes in circles; circles are all that there are when problems are not resolved. Problems are never resolved; the circle buckles. Problems hang like old keys on a ring. I still have difficulties with my ‘artist’s statement’. What can I say? I paint and draw. Dead birds. Dead flowers. Some pretty pictures. I have a part in an exhibition next month, at the Ropetackle Arts Centre in Shoreham – on – Sea. I have been framing photographs, about 25 in all. Funny thing framing. A statement of value. Frame is the boundary. Glass protects. Mount surrounds and enhances. The precious is protected. Art is contradicted by artifice. Taste satisfies its demands on the work. I invent a rationale for the rejection of ‘artists’ statements’, to make myself feel better. It is connected to our culture of management, control, and accountability. My irritability looks for subjects. Escape routes. Sometimes, anything but what might be true. My photographs are a sigh of relief and a reminder.