WHY NICHOLAS MAKES ME BLUE! |
|
|
Blue 1, acrylic on paper, 12 x 9 3/4, collection of the artist |
|
|
Blue 2, acrylic on paper, 12 x 9 3/4, collection of the artist |
|
|
I have been very influenced by the writings of an American theologian, Nicholas Wolterstorff. I first read his theological work regarding art, but I quickly discovered that his writing on aesthetics was merely an extrapolation of a very complex view of the world. I was slowly drawn into the rest of his writing and I have come to deeply appreciate the depth and complexity of the understanding he has of the nature of reality and truth. So much so, I gave serious consideration making his work the subject of my masters thesis.
Wolterstorff is the Noah Porter Professor of Philosophical Theology at Yale (www.yale.edu/divinity/fac/faculty/WOLTER.HTM). Essentially, his theology rotates around a very refined view of the concept of "peace" and its ultimate consequence - "happiness." Put as simply as possible, his work suggests that peace is a series of proper relationships that are marked by indicators such as integrity, respect, or harmony. For him, peace is proper relationship with God, nature, fellow human beings, tools of the hand, etc.
For Wolterstorff, the problems of society are sourced in those things which promote separation, fracture relationship, and breed an atmospheres of suspicion. Ultimately, this means that that he is against anything driven by validation through control and power. Put another way, he is against elitist approaches driven by the need to dominate. Primarily, Wolterstorff's writings within the diverse disciplines of aesthetics, educational theory, sociology, and epistemology share one singular goal - to expose the disharmonious nature of all relations within our era and to correct that by suggesting an alternate perspective.
|
|
|
Blue 3, acrylic on paper, 12 x 9 3/4, collection of the artist |
|
|
In his work on aesthetics ( "Art in Action," "The World and Works of Art," and various articles), Wolterstorff explores the mentalities that have created fractured relationships between the artist and the viewer, the institutions of art and the public, and the ordinary life and high culture.
Within this work, he alludes to the fact that the modern relationship between the artist and medium has been mostly driven by utility or use. The Modern artist, driven by the primary desire to express the inner psychological self, has tended to view the medium as a mere means of expression. Put another way, the Modern artist is driven by a form of narcissism which is predominantly consumed with self-expression at the expense of the medium which is used.
In tandem, Wolterstorff points out, the artist is also attempting to "master" the medium. The artist is hoping to exert such tight control over the medium that all its properties come into the service of the artist alone with nothing left for the medium itself.
From this, you can see that Wolterstorff is, pardon the pun, painting a picture of the artist as having an adversarial (rather than co-operative) relationship with the medium.
In response, Wolterstorff explains that he thinks the artist should have a more harmonious relationship with the medium. He suggests that the artist should love the medium by respecting its properties, its deepest nature, and its relationships with other medium. He insists that the artist should love the medium they are working with. He contends that artists should show this love by trying to understand how exactly the medium works, to explore its depths and extents, to understand its essential properties, and to celebrate the wonders of this knowledge. |
|
|
Blue 4, acrylic on paper, 12 x 9 3/4, collection of the artist |
|
|
The love for medium which Wolterstorff suggests should run deep. To him, the singer should not only love music - its structures, its tones, its tempos, its melodies - but that which constitutes it....sound! In his view, the painter should love paint for paints sake.
What you see here are my attempts to develop the relationship which Wolterstorff suggests. These are not paintings of anything. In fact, they are not intended to be paintings at all. These are not images, they are merely marks. All they happen to be is me applying paint to paper with a trowl (yes, a trowl) and me observing what happens as closely as possible in order to understand the nature of my medium. They attempt to say nothing other than to witness to the fact that I want to love paint.
These four renderings witness to the fact that I have tried (and will continue to try) to observe the way that blue paint relates to paper when the pressure of a trowl is applied and sustained for a period of time. They express my desire to understand how white paint relates to blue paint when placed under the same conditions. They respresent the fact that I want to love paint so deeply that when I create images, the respect and love I have for the medium is not effaced by my desire to express myself. In other words, I do not want to express myself at the expense of paint, nature, humans, or God. |
|
|
|
|