Keeping the beat

Whatā€™s important in painting? Master the basics and the mark-making will take care of itself.


Mother of Pearl and Silver: The Andalusian, 1888ā€“1900, James Abbott McNeill Whistler, National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC. This painting demonstrates the power of letting a single value dominate the composition. 

My husband has this thing he likes to tell young musicians: ā€œJust do what youā€™re doing but do it in time.ā€ Thatā€™s because they like to try things that are more complicated than their skill supports, and they end up losing the beat. He wants them to understand that the beat is whatā€™s essential, not slick fingering.

Of course, young musicians are fascinated with ornamentation. For one thing, itā€™s actually easier than keeping the beat.
On Monday, I wrote, ā€œI never bother much about my mark-making [in drawing]. It can take care of itself. Iā€™m mostly interested in applying accurate values.ā€ If it becomes your focus, mark-making can be the slick fingering that makes you lose the beat.
Thatā€™s not to say that mark-making isnā€™t important. But whatā€™s essential in painting is:
Values: A good painting rests primarily on the framework of a good value structure. This means massed darks in a coherent pattern, simplified shapes, and a limited number of value steps. In a strong composition, one value generally takes precedence over the others. It in effect ā€˜sets the mood.ā€™
Weymouth Bay, 1816, John Constable. This uses closely analogous colors to create cohesiveness in a painting of raw natural elements.
Color: Right now, we focus on color temperature, but that hasnā€™t always been the case. Every generation has had its own ideas about color unity, contrast, and cohesion. A good color structure has balance and a few points of brilliant contrast to drive the eye. It reuses colors in different passages to tie things together.
Movement: A good painter directs his audience to read his work in a specific order, by giving compositional priority to different elements. He uses contrast, line, shape and color to do this. If nothingā€™s moving, the painting will be boring.
Line: These are the edges between forms, rather than literal lines. These edges lead you through the painting. They might be broken (the ā€œlost and found lineā€) or clear and sharp. Their character controls how we perceive the forms they outline.
Even the most linear of painters uses movement to direct the viewer in reading his work. The Grand Baigneuse, also called The ValpinƧon Bather, 1808, Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres, the Louvre.
Form: Paintings are made of two-dimensional shapes, but they create the illusion of form. That is the sense that what weā€™re seeing exists in three dimension. While some abstract painting ignores form, a feeling of depth is critical in representational painting.
Texture: A work is called ā€˜painterlyā€™ when brushstrokes and drawing are not completely controlled, as with Vincent van Gogh. A work is ā€˜linearā€™ when it relies on skillful drawing, shading, and controlled color, as with Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres.
Unity: Do all the parts of the picture feel as if they belong together, or does something feel like it was stuck there as an afterthought? In realism, itā€™s important that objects are proportional to each other. Last-ditch additions to salvage a bad composition usually just destroy a paintingā€™s unity.
Loose brushwork does not mean lack of drawing or preparation. Vase of Sunflowers, 1898, Henri Matisse, Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, Russia.
Balance: While asymmetry is pleasing, any sense that a painting is heavily weighted to one side is disconcerting.
Focus: Most paintings have a main and then secondary focal points. A good artist directs you through them using movement, above.
Rhythm: An underlying rhythm of shapes and color supports that movement.
Content: I realize this is a dated concept, but itā€™s nice if a painting is more than just another pretty face, if it conveys some deeper truth to the viewer.
By the time you master these, scribing and mark-making will come naturally to you.

How to make art that stands the test of time

Occasionally, someone wonders whether an emerging painter will end up being a superstar. Can we ever tell?
Iowa Cornfield, 1941, Grant Wood, courtesy Wikipedia.
This week I contemplated a piece of contemporary art with a gallerist. ā€œI donā€™t see thinking,ā€ she said. ā€œI only see beautiful contours. Itā€™s content-free. There is no struggle.ā€
I canā€™t imagine anything more stultifying than striving to be in the Pantheon of Great Artists. However, the question of what makes great art is an important one. Great art must satisfy long after the flash of novelty dissipates. How does it do that?

The Ghent Altarpiece, early 15th century, Hubert and Jan van Eyck, courtesy Wikipedia.
Technique
It ought to go without saying that mastery of oneā€™s craft is the primary job of the artist. Sadly, thatā€™s not always true in contemporary western art, where ephemeral ideas sometimes mean more than specialized competence. However, if one looks back at art which has staying power, itā€™s always technically superb. How do you get to Carnegie Hall, sister? Practice, practice, practice.
Courage
Art is a process of exploration, a constant revolution. An artist must travel beyond his abilities every time he picks up a brush, or he begins to parody himself. The end of our training is, conversely, the beginning of our real education.
People sometimes tell me that they want to be ā€˜more consistentā€™ in their painting. I think thatā€™s a trap, antithetical to the idea of development. A consistent body of work just comes with time.

Saturn Devouring His Son, 1820ā€“23, Francisco Goya, courtesy Wikipedia.

Emotional content
One reason I hate writing artistā€™s statements is that I believe my real content is inexplicable. You, the outsider, might understand it, but the word-spewing part of my brain never will. Still, I hope my simple trees, boats and rocks convey something greater than their nominal subject.
Thereā€™s lots of art thatā€™s didactic, and Iā€™ve produced much of it myself. But didacticism is not necessary. Nor is it the hallmark of real artistic maturity, which somehow moves beyond issues.
The Railway, 1873, Ɖdouard Manet, courtesy Wikipedia.
Within the vision of our times
Johann Sebastian Bach is recognized as one of the greatest composers of history. His period and his style were the Baroque. He was one of its last practitioners. He grew up within its aesthetic and it reached a climax in his writing. He was both within the vision of his time and the full flowering of that vision.
Knowing whether weā€™re painting within our period is difficult. In my first class with Cornelia Foss, she had me paint an orange on a tray. ā€œIf it was 1950, Iā€™d say ā€˜Bravaā€™,ā€ she said. ā€œBut itā€™s not.ā€ It was the best criticism Iā€™ve ever receivedā€”she was telling me my technique was fine, but my style was dated.
Weā€™re not Hudson River painters, weā€™re not Dutch Golden Age painters. This is the 21st century, and we need to paint what speaks to our peers. Thatā€™s often uncomfortable, and frequently a mystery.
You canā€™t count on your audience for advice with this. They’re as mystified as we are.
Bach was forgotten soon after his death. His works were rediscovered by Felix Mendelssohn. In 1823 Mendelssohnā€™s grandmother gave him a copy of the score for Bach’s St. Matthew Passion. Five years later, Mendelssohn mounted a performance of this long-forgotten masterpiece. His selfless promotion of a dead artist gave Bach his rightful place in music history.