“Contemporary art cannot be built on the foundations of the modern. It speaks a totally different language. Just like one can’t tear down an old house and build a newer, bigger, taller house sitting on the old foundation. The older foundations are restrictive towards the extra size and weight thus it stunts one’s creativity. If you want to build bigger, taller houses, one needs to forgo the older footings and build newer foundations for the new house one is building. Contemporary art is a new language. Narrative, not just skill is required. I’m sorry if you think otherwise.”
“Art always emphasizes on the focal point of a picture. It is that spot where your eye fixes and the whole composition grows and revolves around it. That interpreted, if art then is nature, the focal point would be the crater atop the volcano as seen on plan where everything caves in. And everything that revolves around it are just bleak terrains. Of hardened lava perhaps? Where then is the garden where a child hops around splattering their feet in the stream? Where then are the decayed logs where the mushrooms sprout? And the spiders spin their webs? Where then does the rabbit burrows? Does such formality always apply on every subject matter in art? For someone who has been dabbling in art for four decades and growing, I would say no.
If someone painted humor, that humor would be constrained if the composition is symmetrical. That turns the painting into a whimper of giggles instead of listening to a big loud roar. Why is that so? Because where the focal points are, there, symmetry would be also. Symmetry draws stiffness unless that is what is intended in your composition.
The conclusion is, subject matters will decide your composition. A good composition is about balance, not symmetry. Good artist will know when to emphasize on focal points and when it needs to disintegrate into a landscape garden. Paintings with a focal point may draw attentions better initially, but given that if you are going to live with it and face it all day long for the next five years or more, it is those without a focal point that won’t bore you. Perhaps it may also be because men are all born hunters, their affinity to nature and garden is natural indeed. That said, paintings without focal points are not necessarily bad compositions. All in all, it still depends on the context. Especially in larger sized paintings, try to compose a garden. There are lots of stories to tell in a garden and people’s eyes wander around when in a garden. That’s what makes larger paintings come alive. The experienced aficionados of art has got to agree even when the conventional audience disagree.”
Taste is the ability to judge what is beautiful, good and proper. It is aesthetically driven. Not by the most exquisite of brands. But by the ability to juggle form, color, texture, patterns and space well. Not everyone has taste. That’s why brands sell.
“It is ironical for a self proclaimed printmaker to sell the matrixes separately from the prints in an arts show not unless the print edition is classified ‘unique’ and it came accompanied with the matrix. If the matrix is sold separately as a work of art beit or not at a reduced price, then the purchaser of the prints should be informed and those matrixes shall then by right be regarded as ‘wood carvings’ which in this case is not since the artist did not regard himself as a ‘wood carver’. This wood carving is by right a tool, medium or mode the printmaker uses to create his art and at most times is kept by the printmaker or dispose of since it no longer has meaning after the ‘unique’ copy is sold. The question then arises that if both prints and matrixes are up for sale, which then should a collector collect in this case and which has more value? The logical answer would be the print since that is the ‘end result’ of the printmakers craft and the matrix is but the ‘medium’. But preferably, the collector of the ‘unique’ print should own the matrix also if the printmaker wishes not to keep it. And it is not ethical for the printmaker to sell both the positive and negative separately, each as an artwork by itself. Moreover whoever owns the matrix could summon for multiple re-edition of prints made without the knowledge and consent of the printmaker or the owner of the unique print. And this, the ignorant collector should by right be informed as it lends concerns towards authentication issues.
If one looks back at the history of printmaking, the craftsmen doesn’t sell their matrixes. And in each artwork, there are as many matrixes as there are colors encountered.The key point to know about matrixes is that it is technically not ‘the’ work of art although many may admire its reverse intricacy and it will not appreciate in value or have a value equivalent to the print from which it is printed from provided in due course, the unique print is unintentionally or intentionally destroyed, went missing or disposed of for whatever reasons. In the last case the matrix can acquire antique value with collectors of matrixes which is rare or museums of printmaking provided the printmaker is highly regarded in the printing world.
The next question that beckons interest is can collectors add value to a series of prints that he deliberately purchased and then have them destroyed to reduce the edition number? The answer is yes. Scarcity adds value to the print concern provided the matrix held by the artist is also destroyed. But that act should preferably be staged as a public performance known to the art community. It must also be remembered that the act of destroying cannot be constituted as an element or trajectory of the print provided the artist is physically involved in the process. That act itself also does not lend new meaning to the original intention it was meant as a print neither does that act transforms it into conceptual art or makes the collector the artist of that print.
There is a tendency for collectors to want to add value to his collection by this act. But generally not unless he is the sole owner of that print, and provided it is a work from a notable printmaker.”
“Good design in the broadest sense are either decorative or functional art made either to fascinate, thrill or leave a lasting impression upon other men, to improve and beautify his own environment and others as well, to serve or assist men in his daily living in relation or compliance with men’s own ergonomic limitations, expectations and mobility, and to fulfill men’s imbued purpose- which is to create a better world for ourselves and our habitat .Preferably also, it is made of sustainable materials”