1000 Posts and Still Counting

Say tuned for more about tricycles.

Today is my One Thousandth post, and I was tossing and turning all night trying to think of something worthy. No lightening bolts, no transforming insights, just another morning of being awake way too early. So I'm going to just write about my morning encounters so far (it's only 8:30, don't get nervous- how much can I encounter in that short time!)

First of all, you'd never believe I'm in South Florida. I had to wear my (too small for public wearing) cashmere sweater, a wool scarf, mittens and a heavy sweatshirt to walk today. Still I came in with a red face, runny eyes, and out of breath from the cold. Hope this isn't my future winter! Last year was chilly enough- I could barely wear my sandals! OK, so I am worried somewhat about climate change, I am worried a great deal about my orchids that I neglected to bring inside last night. They are looking less than perky this morning.

I am not nervous about snakes, in spite of the fact that Florida has every single variety of poisonous snake found in the US. But for some reason I have seen way too many snakes this year, mostly of the harmless bug eating varieties that I don't mind at all. But yesterday I pulled into the driveway and got out and stepped on a black snake that was about done in by my tires. I felt terrible about running him over, but apologies seemed a bit too little too late. Poor thing.

Not to be confused with:

We also have an abundance ot toads this year, the Bufo variety that are poisonous to dogs. In one of the Carl Hiaasen novels I love, spoofs on Florida and it's crazy residents, the former govenor dries them out and smokes them to get high. I have no idea if this is a viable method of intoxication or a literary device, or perhaps just Hiaasens way of eradicating the critters. Culling the herd. Anyway, lots of toads this year from the ones that would be able to sit on my pinky fingernail to granddaddies that would probably weigh a pound.

Boston Globe photography and arts critic, Mark Feeney, presented his lecture "Four Photographers on Three Wheels: William Eggleston's Tricycle and Before" at American Art's McEvoy Auditorium the other night at the Smithsonian. Here it is, well worth a few minutes:


I hope you caught the quotation near the end where Feeney references Roche:

"A lot of art is the notation of loving something, the 'What' really doesn't matter in the least."

Keep this in mind as I ramble on. Then, while reading my SAQA list emails. Jill was talking about jurying a show as a self trained artist and having to prove herself (actually her work already does that but I understand that sometimes when one is self trained one must prove oneself TO oneself!) by putting together a great show. She firmly hits on a point that always rankles me about jurying- you can only jury from the pool of applicants and unless the work is there in front of you, it can't be included. One of my first jury experiences was hideous- I was presented wth a pile of craft stuff across the board for a special exhibit for a national oganization which I won't mention but had something to do with daughters... Heh heh. It was 'special' all right- acrylic crochet toilet paper cozies, dolls with walleyes made from patterns, a christening dress with throw-up spots on it, and some wooden toys with the nail points coming out the back sides. And the organizer had about twenty prizes that HAD to be awarded. Crap, all crap, not one thing that was noteworthy for it's originality or craftsmanship, or even color selection! I did my best, I stuck ribbons willy nilly because I had to. And then I respectfully asked that it not be known who the 'jury' might have been, because, like Pogo, I had seen the enemy and it was us! So, blaming the jury for a show that doesn't excite us is basically like blaming the messenger.

There is much discussion about shows being 'representational' or 'abstract' in nature lately, mostly brought up by the Schweinfurth slide show that has been circulating (see the link on my 'Find Me Here' page above). Personally I was proud of the fine show that was presented- they have certainly come a long way from the old days of mostly traditional work, and it''s hung beautifully. But someone suggested that their work wasn't chosen by this show or seveal other shows because it was 'representational' and that seems to be 'out' with the jurors now. I don't know if this is true or not, but I have always thought of my own stuff as representational since it's so narrative based so perhaps I'm not in a position to take sides. It's all cyclical anyway, things come and go in favor, and it doesn't mean work isn't good- just that it doesn't fit the flavor of the day at a given point. Hey, I haven't been exhibiting nearly as much as I used to because I am sort of the rum raisin on the flavor list, not for everyone's tastes.


In another message from Jeanne that I found thought provoking, she had been reading a book about Georgia O'Keefe's art, here she is paraphrased:

(Georgia) "says that she couldn't be
herself anywhere except in her paintings. (Remember, this is in the 1920-30's. Women couldn't even vote) She felt that she could say what ever she wanted in her paintings, and it would be her voice, and no one could tell her what to say. She ended up being a very successful artist, and influenced a great many other artists. We should all be as hard working, and successful!"

Yes indeedy. She has been so successful that her work has become a cliche of itself and is copied far and wide in every imaginable medium. How many 'big close-up flowers' have you seen done in fabric that are derivitive of Georgia's? I'm not saying that a flower should be off the chart as a subject but it is hard to overcome her already successful and groundbreaking interpretations of that as a subject. If flowers you want, you have to go somewhere else with them. If it's self exprression and individualistic art you want to emulate then go for it with a vengence. Find a subject and chew it to death, explore it until it bores you and then slide on to something else and examine it with the same intensity. The thing we should get from Georgia is her devotion to the explorations of her own self expression. And it seems to me she is firmly in both camps, representational AND abstract.

I will repeat now because it's so important:

"A lot of art is the notation of loving something, the 'what' really doesn't matter in the least."

And to tie this all up, what I am trying to say is that it doesn't matter what your art looks like if it is true and authentic and that should be what you do and what you are proud to enter and exhibit. Believe me, the jurors do pick up on that and that is what makes a good show. Please cease and desist doing a 'Minnie Pearl' quilt because Minnie is on the jury! You won't impress her- she knows full well what her work looks like and doesn't want or need to see other people's second guessing of what they *think* she likes! And to bring it full circle, back to Jill's request for good work to be submitted to the show she is jurying- yes DO IT! Enter, but enter only your most personal and authentic work. Give her a huge pool to work with! She WILL pull the best of the best, she may be self educated in her own art but (hold on here)

SHE KNOWS WHAT SHE LIKES WHEN SHE SEES IT!

And she can tell you why! And that is the difference.

So, I guess now I say that I hope you stay tuned for the next thousand posts! Thanks for reading. S

And finally, of course, the Horror-Scope:

It's exciting when your feelings fall into place and lift your spirits. But it's even better when you can put your emotions into words and communicate them to someone close to you. However, you might be disappointed if you don't receive the support you are seeking. Don't expect too much from others now because it may take them a while to fully understand what you need.