Well, I'm putting this painting up here, but, like I seem to say about all my work, it isn't done. But this one really isn't done because there are specific things that bug me about it. I am putting it up just to get it out there - and if there are any suggestions I would love to hear them!
In it, I am playing with how to break up the image - to divide it, and in doing so, hopefully try and break down the inherent hierarchy of importance of 'figure in a random space'. I guess I am experimenting with how to disintegrate the hierarchy without giving into the obscurity and scholarly disengagement of abstraction. I've been looking a lot at Peter Doig, a painter who has also attempted this in some of his paintings. He chooses images that don't necessarily have any personal meaning though, so while they convey meaning to an audience, they are not loaded with meaning for him. I think I may try this tact next because my work of late has started to come off a bit... 'emo', if you will.
So, I also wanted to talk about one of my random ideas that crossed my mind, mostly to get some responses. I recently watched this lecture on the brain, synæsthesia, and art. (The full lecture can be seen at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NzShMiqKgQ ). The lecture was a bit scattered, but there were some very interesting bits. Synæsthesia is the condition in some people's brains to experience one sensory experience simultaneously with another, ie. seeing colors when you hear particular sounds or reading the number seven as blue. He goes on to say that there are many degrees to which people experience this, and that some great artists, poets, and scientists are actually synesthetes (Kandinsky and Hockney to name some painters). But from there he goes on to discuss what he calls 'metaphorical thinkers'. I believe many artists think in terms of metaphors. They might not be synesthetes, but they strongly feel the correspondence of different senses and use it to help them understand the world. While I don't physically see colors that correspond to sounds, I can certainly empathize with what it must be like, and while I don't involuntarily attach personalities to numbers or colors, I can see how one could. Sounds definitely can have shapes, stormy weather is angry, and the light on a late summer's afternoon can taste like honey. In my mind at least. When you have a good metaphor in your mind to correspond with a feeling or an idea, it seems like a very earnest way to express your thought without using out and out narrative or simply using art to illustrate your concept. The art actually becomes your idea. There is a trans-formative experience (as Michael Paraskos might say).
So now I've been wondering about everyone else. I know I've had conversations touching on this with a few close friends, but I'm wondering how many people out there -- if not synesthetes -- would consider themselves metaphorical thinkers, and if so, do you use this way of thinking in your art making? I'd love to hear your thoughts and experiences!
