24" x24"
oil on canvas
« Haiku What? | Main | Season's Greetings From An Undisclosed Location »
TIME ERODES
About
John Cox is a painter, cartoonist, and illustrator for hire. For information about purchasing existing work or commissioning new work, contact him by e-mail at john555cox [at] hotmail.com.
Search
About This Page
This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on December 23, 2007 3:02 PM.
The previous post in this blog was Haiku What?.
The next post in this blog is Season's Greetings From An Undisclosed Location.
Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.
Powered by
Movable Type 3.35
Movable Type 3.35
Comments (8)
HEY JOHN
In spite of the fact that--as subjects go--I'm not all that fond of male figure studies, I REALLY like this painting.
To what degree is the turpentine technique of your own development, & to what degree is it adapted?
Posted by Terwiliger | December 24, 2007 5:05 AM
Posted on December 24, 2007 05:05
HEY TERWILIGER
Of course, you've seen drippy, loose paint used by a multitude of painters, but I was never taught how to do it. I developed my own look out of necessity.
Posted by john Cox | December 24, 2007 12:17 PM
Posted on December 24, 2007 12:17
HEY JOHN
As painting technique & art "critiquery" [in terms of form & style] go, I'm a complete ignoramus.
Posted by Terwiliger | December 24, 2007 2:38 PM
Posted on December 24, 2007 14:38
I'm much more in tuned to "what art does" than "how it's done."
Posted by Terwiliger | December 24, 2007 2:40 PM
Posted on December 24, 2007 14:40
Now that's an interesting thought:
'What art does vs how it's done.'
Cannot the 'doing' (how) have an effect on the affect?
Posted by GarandFan | December 24, 2007 9:46 PM
Posted on December 24, 2007 21:46
HEY GARANDFAN
Absolutely.
However, an understanding of one doesn't imply an equal understanding of the other.
There are plenty of people with awesome technical faculties that are comparatively inept (ex., Saliere as compared to Mozart in Amadeus).
By the same token, there are many who have crafted works of enormous magnitude that can neither understand nor explain how they did what they did. They are both technically gifted & expressive, yet they don't understand how the two connect (there are writings on this subject from at least Aristotle to Tolstoy).
There are those who have no understanding of the creative aspects of a given craft...yet they are quite adept at distinguishing between "true art" & craft.
Confounding the issue are talentless hacks who achieve massive critical acclaim, as well as those who can't tell their rears from a hole in the ground who are seen as "experts" (or critics).
Then there are those--& I believe they are the vast majority of people--who don't give any of this stuff much thought at all. They like what they like & they do what they do, & they don't want to be bothered with details.
Rarest of all is the true artist who understands all aspects of his craft from the inception of an idea to the impression he creates.
Posted by Terwiliger | December 26, 2007 12:00 AM
Posted on December 26, 2007 00:00
HEY TERWILIGER
I'm TRYIN'...... G**damn. I'M TRYIN'!
Posted by john Cox | December 26, 2007 1:28 AM
Posted on December 26, 2007 01:28
HEY JOHN
Now that's funny right there.
I know that you know that I was writing in terms of generalities...& that I wasn't commenting on anyone in particular...
But that's funny right there...I don't care who you are.
Posted by Terwiliger | December 26, 2007 5:13 AM
Posted on December 26, 2007 05:13