I came into printmaking via digital images and still use digital tools, for example to make stencils, as I have described in various posts here. When I can’t get into my studio, whether lack of time, or more recently health issues again, I also like to play with my software of choice, Paint Shop Pro, to make digital prints. These may or may not end up n the shop, my main reason for making them is simply to keep my creative eye in practice.
These are two of the latest such prints, both monochromatic, both and made from some old photos of mine of the now demolished ‘Get Carter’ shopping centre in Gateshead. The main image is one of the source files. It was pretty much abandoned when I took them, and I was vaguely aiming for the same grey dystopic feel. The first of these seems to capture that feeling quite well.
Dystopia 1
Working on the second digital image, however, it decided to take a different path. Instead of a brutalist buildings, I saw not architecture but some sort of engineering structure, floating in space. This may have come via the TV series, ‘The Expanse’. Then I noticed a round white shape with what looked a bit like an outstretched arm, and out of that came the title, ‘Space Walk’. I’ve added a detail below in case I’m seeing things…
Space Walk
Space walk – detail
I love the smoky, grainy aspect of both these digital images and think they would work well as photopolymer etchings. That’s certainly something I intend to try.
After a series of recent health issues, It was sheer delight to get out and about. I chose to see this exhibition of work by Eleanor Bartlett. I had seen one piece by her before, also at the Vanner Gallery. It was by far and away the best in that show.
She paints using very utilitarian materials, metal paint and bitumen from hardware stores. The work, though, transcends the hum drum nature of the materials. The large paintings have an overpowering presence which dominates their surroundings. Even the smaller one have a physicality which transforms them from 2D painting to sculptural objects. I’ve quoted Terry Frost before, “To look at a painting which gives you the opportunity to have solitude, to be yourself and to be able to wander into reverie, is more than hedonistic, it’s spiritual” and these works have that same quality. They have a depth into which one can fall. They also seem to have a history, with a sense of millennia of accretion and erosion, all leading to the object before the eye.
Unfortunately, you don’t have long to see the show – it closes on Saturday. I’m sorry I didn’t make it earlier, if only so that I could have gone again. If you can make it to Salisbury in time, I recommend you make the effort.
Since the cave paintings at Lascaux and similar locations were painted before concepts of composition were even thought of, are they art?
Some time ago, in a Facebook group, someone asked this good question.
My initial answer was as below.
I doubt if the people making them saw them as ‘art’. That’s imposing our view of the world on the makers. From our perspective, though, yes they are art. Plus, places like Lascaux were painted by numerous hands, perhaps over centuries. They are not single compositions. What they show though is considered mark making towards an idea.
I suspect the principles they were following were more in the line of magical thinking than aesthetics. They may have thought, “if I paint this animal being killed, we will be successful on our next hunt.” Another possibility is that it was an offering to the spirit world, giving thanks for a successful hunt. Both these have been found in modern times by anthropologists. Whatever it was, they seem to have had something guiding them. They were not just throwing pigment around at random.
Sadly, the discussion didn’t progress much. The rest of this post is based on the argument I was trying to make. It includes a few extra points that didn’t occur to me at the time.
I now think the original question was based on a false premise. We don’t know if they had ideas about composition. We do know that they are not random daubs on a wall. They represent a significant human achievement, only possible because of a great deal of effort and time. They meant something to their makers.
We can never know the motives of the makers or the guiding principles they were working under. We can only speculate. Our speculations cannot fail to be coloured by our own world view, as was the original questioner.
The question of what was in the minds of the original makers of these paintings is a different question to whether they are ‘art.’ We don’t even know if the makers had a concept of art as an endeavour in its own right. There seems to have been an urge to decorate, shown in other finds from many similar cultures, but we still don’t know why it was done.
If we shift our viewpoint from looking at cave paintings to looking at scientific illustrations, it is perhaps clearer. Hooke made incredibly detailed and brilliantly executed drawings of what he saw in his microscope. These are hugely valuable in terms of their scientific intent. To see them as art means looking at them from the perspective of a separate set of values to those of the original maker. The one doesn’t negate the other. Both reference frameworks can apply simultaneously.
In the end, I suspect defining art is like defining a game. After all, what links tennis, golf, poker and Resident Evil? All games, but we would find it hard to describe the common characteristic. So in my view art includes Lascaux cave paintings, Neolithic rock carving, Medieval illuminated manuscripts, Rembrandt, Monet, Malevich, Hockney, Basquiat, and David Bailey.
Hooke is close enough in time for us to have some idea of his thought processes. I think we can feel reasonably confident that he had a sense of his work as having an aesthetic value beyond being a ‘just’ a scientific illustration. We can’t know whether the creators of cave paintings had ideas or concepts of composition, or what they were thinking. We can be sure, though, that they were thinking…
This post is related to several others about meaning in art.
Neolithic art has also provided inspiration for many of my own prints.
Rocking in Rhythm #1 mixed media pastel over monoprintHammer marks on Weardale
