It's funny how I have gotten so immersed in art that I tend
to project very human emotions or ideas to inanimate objects in paintings and
|Still life painting objects that don't spatial connect in some way
most often won't connect thematically for a viewer either.
Take still life paintings for example. In a contemporary
still life painting
where objects don't overlap, there's no real sense of how
any one object relates to the other, so there's no visual connection to bridge
the spaces between them. The whole composition can seem random or indecisive.
But it's not the objects themselves that impart this sense, and it's doubtful
that the still life artists who created the works meant to amplify these kinds
of hesitant ideas. No, I believe it comes down to the arrangement of the
When objects are grouped into pairs or clusters, so that
they overlap when seen from the viewer's perspective, there's a sense of depth
and continuity or wholeness to the work. And vice versa. When objects are
isolated, they seem...isolated. And vice vice versa, or whatever. If there are
too many objects crowded into a still life oil painting, it all seems jumbled
Such a simple idea, overlapping and spacing, and yet it can
have major consequences. It is a good reminder for me because a still life painting
can really affect a viewer's sensibility and give off very different vibes with
just a few different choices made by the artist.
||Objects arranged together as a whole make for a stronger,
more compelling composition.
Certainly my study of art has led me to be sensitive to the
results of these different choices. But American
has also amplified my learning as well. There's just so
much instruction in any one issue that helps fire my
engines and allows me to assess any number of artworks with a keen and more
artist-minded eye--because I'm learning from the artists themselves. If that
sounds like what you are looking for, you can have the same with a subscription
to American Artist