After my visit to Portland's Art Museum I have been thinking a lot about "abstract" art, a term many would apply to my work. However, I would define abstraction as the simplification of form from an original source. I think a more accurate term for my work would be "non-objective". That is to say my work uses forms, planes, line and iconography to create a presence (painting/image). That is a good argument I had with myself, but we are all organic beings that are in and of nature, and my work is definitely a deeply personal reaction to my environment much like music is. I have heard it said you can't paint a piece of music, but I think you can give a visual expression in much the same way a musician do with music. Using colors, lines hard edged or soft and atmospheric. So I guess my work is more "non-objective" than it is "abstract" given my previous definitions. This work was a musical interpretation of the brilliant colors of fall with sharp edges, and the skittering of dry leaves on the pavement and blustery winds rattling the trees. So grab a cuppa and please enjoy it.!
Reply With Quote