The Evolution of Mass Consciousness and the Advent of Contemporary Representational Painting
Original oil paintings, in this age of easily, cheaply reproduced images and giclees of famous and not so famous paintings, photography, and paintings done from second generation, two dimensional formats such as paintings of other paintings, or photos, seem to be like the steam engine, an outdated but beautiful relic, only to be appreciated in a museum, or the home of a wealthy art collector.
That maybe changing, with the shift in the art world from postmodernism to contemporary, representational painting styles.
Much of this new wave that is sweeping the art world is primarily an outgrowth of the evolution in the mass consciousness.
The increasing awareness of human consciousness is that reality is not immutable, and that truth is mostly subjective but also contains a small amount of objectivity.
The acknowledgment that our perceptions of things affect our experience of the world, and that reality is mostly subjective, has fostered the reemerging interest in classical, original oil painting styles that we see today.
There hasn't been a better time to become an oil painter of classical, representational, original paintings done from direct observation of nature, than right now.
Classical ateliers, which embrace the time honored, but almost lost and hard to come by, original oil painting techniques of the masters among the renaissance artists, are springing up like mushrooms all over the country.
The length of time required to produce a highly developed oil painting as long been an impediment to both the ability of an artist to make a living at doing it, and to meet demands of interested buyers.
This single fact, as well documented in the excellent piece by Fred Ross, his keynote address to the Oil Painters of America and which can be read in full by clinking on the link in the resource box to the Art Renewal Center, was historically the biggest catalyst to the birth of modern art.
Art galleries and dealers needed to expedite the production of original oil paintings so they could make more money.
It was just taking too long for patrons to wait a full year for a full size original painting by Alma-Tadema or Waterhouse; and even at top dollar prices, it wasn't as lucrative as selling cubist paintings that could be pumped out in a day.
So, the modern art movement was born.
And although I agree with Fred Ross that economics was the biggest driving force in the beginnings of modern art, he leaves out the important fact that THAT was just the storyline which reflected what FIRST was a change in the mass consciousness.
Acknowledging this premise allows for a less judgmental attitude toward modern art, and in fact, validates the part it played in the evolution of our mass consciousness.
Although I prefer the classical representational art, I respect modern art as a valid experience.
There was certainly plenty of " the Emperor's new clothes" going on for the last hundred and fifty years, or so.
But modern art should be seen as an outgrowth of the evolution of human consciousness, rather than some external conspiracy that was foisted upon us by a handful of business savvy art dealers in New York City during the turn of the last century.
Like many of my contemporaries that prefer to paint original oil paintings from directly observed nature, whether it be the human figure or a landscape or a piece of fruit, it is the painting experience itself that is conducive to states of being that are timeless and blissful.
Most of us painters that prefer to use traditional materials and methods keep doing what we do because of the exquisite and transcendent quality of the time spent in the creation of an original oil painting.
For me, there is nothing to compare to the sensory experience of holding a paint brush, sitting with nature, looking for the light, solving a painting problem, and creating something beautiful.
Even the smell of oil paint gets me going.
Well, those last lines inspire me to finish this article so I can go paint something beautiful...
And I suspect that buyers of original oil paintings enjoy and value similar sensory experiences, which are of a wholly different quality than viewing, holding or displaying a print or a photograph, even a beautiful one.
In a later article I will discuss the experiential difference between observing an original oil painting that was painted from direct observation of nature, and an oil painting that is created solely from, say, a photograph.
And although the experience felt by the viewer, may be very subtle, and to many, imperceptibly different, it still makes for an interesting discussion, especially if you are sensitive to energy.
And although I am not adverse, by any means, to using photographs as reference material in my painting process, it is important to note that it should be thought of as merely a tool that should only be used by the well trained eye.
An oil painter that does not have the skill set that rigorous optical training in drawing and painting from life affords, will not understand how to translate the visual information in the photograph successfully to an oil painting.
Copyright 2010
That maybe changing, with the shift in the art world from postmodernism to contemporary, representational painting styles.
Much of this new wave that is sweeping the art world is primarily an outgrowth of the evolution in the mass consciousness.
The increasing awareness of human consciousness is that reality is not immutable, and that truth is mostly subjective but also contains a small amount of objectivity.
The acknowledgment that our perceptions of things affect our experience of the world, and that reality is mostly subjective, has fostered the reemerging interest in classical, original oil painting styles that we see today.
There hasn't been a better time to become an oil painter of classical, representational, original paintings done from direct observation of nature, than right now.
Classical ateliers, which embrace the time honored, but almost lost and hard to come by, original oil painting techniques of the masters among the renaissance artists, are springing up like mushrooms all over the country.
The length of time required to produce a highly developed oil painting as long been an impediment to both the ability of an artist to make a living at doing it, and to meet demands of interested buyers.
This single fact, as well documented in the excellent piece by Fred Ross, his keynote address to the Oil Painters of America and which can be read in full by clinking on the link in the resource box to the Art Renewal Center, was historically the biggest catalyst to the birth of modern art.
Art galleries and dealers needed to expedite the production of original oil paintings so they could make more money.
It was just taking too long for patrons to wait a full year for a full size original painting by Alma-Tadema or Waterhouse; and even at top dollar prices, it wasn't as lucrative as selling cubist paintings that could be pumped out in a day.
So, the modern art movement was born.
And although I agree with Fred Ross that economics was the biggest driving force in the beginnings of modern art, he leaves out the important fact that THAT was just the storyline which reflected what FIRST was a change in the mass consciousness.
Acknowledging this premise allows for a less judgmental attitude toward modern art, and in fact, validates the part it played in the evolution of our mass consciousness.
Although I prefer the classical representational art, I respect modern art as a valid experience.
There was certainly plenty of " the Emperor's new clothes" going on for the last hundred and fifty years, or so.
But modern art should be seen as an outgrowth of the evolution of human consciousness, rather than some external conspiracy that was foisted upon us by a handful of business savvy art dealers in New York City during the turn of the last century.
Like many of my contemporaries that prefer to paint original oil paintings from directly observed nature, whether it be the human figure or a landscape or a piece of fruit, it is the painting experience itself that is conducive to states of being that are timeless and blissful.
Most of us painters that prefer to use traditional materials and methods keep doing what we do because of the exquisite and transcendent quality of the time spent in the creation of an original oil painting.
For me, there is nothing to compare to the sensory experience of holding a paint brush, sitting with nature, looking for the light, solving a painting problem, and creating something beautiful.
Even the smell of oil paint gets me going.
Well, those last lines inspire me to finish this article so I can go paint something beautiful...
And I suspect that buyers of original oil paintings enjoy and value similar sensory experiences, which are of a wholly different quality than viewing, holding or displaying a print or a photograph, even a beautiful one.
In a later article I will discuss the experiential difference between observing an original oil painting that was painted from direct observation of nature, and an oil painting that is created solely from, say, a photograph.
And although the experience felt by the viewer, may be very subtle, and to many, imperceptibly different, it still makes for an interesting discussion, especially if you are sensitive to energy.
And although I am not adverse, by any means, to using photographs as reference material in my painting process, it is important to note that it should be thought of as merely a tool that should only be used by the well trained eye.
An oil painter that does not have the skill set that rigorous optical training in drawing and painting from life affords, will not understand how to translate the visual information in the photograph successfully to an oil painting.
Copyright 2010