Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Perspective on perspective

Tonight saw me using two pieces of technology I recently had dropped in my lap. Thankfully, as both were needed.
A printer from Ashley.
A digital camera from my dad.
With the camera I took a photo from which I extracted the above image. I printed it with my printer. Tomorrow I will work from this image in the studio.
Of course I've painted stripes before, but the starburst cut in Casual Friday Morning Coming Down got me thinking about about perspective, my more and more sturdy steps into painting with a brush and tube has had me thinking about illusionistic space.
The construction barriers allow a nice guide to perspective.

I've been thinking a lot about what it means to be raised, and educated in a place, Calgary, with an abundance of all the things you would not immediately choose for a painter's education, and with such a physical distance from the relics of painting's history.
When I search for a technique, my comfort is with the exercise books that taught me, with the exercises that demonstrated illusionistic perspective to me.
The worn out points that can't be erased, the Star Wars hyperspeed lines that get erased, the boxes, the white and black and white and black.
I feel shaky writing here again but I am back working at laundromat, so will likely be writing more.


Panic said...

Casual Friday Morning really struck me at the show, and I took a photo detail of the yellow on black lines, so it's interesting this is something you're working with more. I'm interested to see how it comes out!

Wil Murray said...

hmmm...It scared the shit out of me when i finished it, but it lingers on.

sophiaface said...

Have you seen many historical paintings in person?

Hooray for blogs. Write tons and tons!

Wil Murray said...

Well(and you know I'm long winded)....
Yes? No?
I've seen more than I ever have before.
I suppose I am talking about my own reading of history, which, for example, does include Olistki, but doesn't really include Titian(both artists I whose work I've stood in front of).
However, if we're talking about artists whose work I've never seen in person, these distinctions don't hold up. Or become one more step removed, like " My constructed history of painting includes photos of Rosenquist's work, but not photos of Bonnard's).
I have favourite artists whose work I've never seen(Fries, Rae, Pollack), and artists whose work has become more weighty in having the opportunity to see and revisit their work(Molinari, Piermarini, Borduas) and artists whose work has been diminished in seeing it(Rioplelle).
All this is useless, as I am not a fixed point which has all of these things moving about him. I am as fickle as anyone. To look at a photograph of a painting and love it, and then to see the painting and not...well, it might have nothing to do with photography or painting.

Whenever I go to NY I don't have the money to go the museum. So travel the galleries and am delighted to have little control in what artists and what work shapes my art history.