I did Tethered Sphere in a mixed media of Dr Martin's Dyes and Berol Prismacolor pencils.
It is an image of a colorful sphere resembling a planet which is secured with metal bands. It is suspended over water and tethered by ropes tied to three humming birds flying underwater. On the horizon is a mountain range and a dramatic sky.
This is one of those paintings that has a lot of symbolism that probably isn't understood by a lot of people. (At least I hope I am not the only who doesn't get it. Me not getting it doesn't mean there is any thing wrong. I don't get alot of Picasso's work either and think how great he was.) Each of the parts renders itself well. The background sky and mountain are beautifully done. I understand the orb to be a planet and the birds are definitely hummingirds. The significance of all the pieces together is what the puzzle is. Of course that keeps your interest. It makes me wonder what you are trying to say and makes my mind work to figure it out. The background as a stand alone painting would be nice but wouldn't keep my interest. It wouldn't make me wonder.
I am very interested. I don't really appreciate much "surreal" work. The symbolism of surreal work in general tends to be way too personal, and often tends to be extremely academic. That said, I like this one. Although it is surreal, there are enough common grounding elements to speak to me. I don't know what you want to communicate, but to me the elements read as follows;
The planet is having problems, as symbolized by the red fiery colors. The birds symbolize a general force of nature, animals in good health usually do. "Nature" is trying to steer the planet somewhere, as indicated by the tethers. The destination appears to be a healthier "condition", as symbolized by what we percieve as a peaceful "healthy" nature.
The reason I am "translating" your painting is because it is vitally important for an artist to know what the viewer gets out of a piece of art. If a viewer's translation is problematic to the artist, the artist should consider usinig a different "vocabulary". I am continuously struggling with symbolism, vocabulary, and how art communicates to the viewer. I thought this type of dialog would be helpful in your endeavors.
Finally, I would like to make a composition comment. I would like to see the piece more focussed with less background. Modern technology allows us to see this immediately. I hope you aren't upset that I took your file and manipulated it. Note how the composition changes the overall dynamic, giving it a grander sense of drama and focus.
Thanks for sharing. Overall, I really enjoy the piece. The technique is outstanding. The medium choice is interesting. The attention to detail amazing. I really wouldn't change anything with this piece. I just wanted to give you some food for thought for your next piece.
This piece is beautifully done, and though I don't know what the imagery means to you, it doesn't matter because i am free to find my own meaning. that said, I like the image of the birds tethering the sphere, and the choice to have them dancing underwater while doing so. How fun! I like the tension this creates within the piece, and the stories I have come up with for myself. Your colors are beautiful; this painting keeps me tethered to it!
Well, actually there is nothing to "get". There is no personal meaning, symbolism or message. I simply wanted to have an interesting juxtaposition of elements in a reality that doesn't exist. That is what surrealism is to me, in the same way as optical illusions. They have no agenda. They are just fun to look at.
Sketch, no offense taken. I really like your cropping selection. It does indeed make it more dramatic. I'll have to pay more attention to that in future pieces.
One thing that does make me very happy is that everyone comes up with a scenario that suits themselves. You guys are great!
I am about to get extremely academic here. I am about to discuss the relevance of symbolism, communication, and art. I feel like stepping on a pedastol, and that is what "critiques" are about. This forum is about positive creative input, and I am about to give it. I am also about to address some pretty personal subjects. This is purely an academic exercise to encourage all artists, not only "nightmareartist", to think about their art. That said, this is in response to nightmareartist's "Thanks for the feedback" message.
Your work deserves more than that explanation. You are presenting art for a viewer. It is communication. You are using a visual vocabulary. To say that there is no personal meaning or message is a cop-out.
To ignore the symbolism, the vocabulary, is short-sighted and irresponsible. For example, I can take 5 words out of a dictionary at random (I am really doing this). I am opening a dictionary and pointing a finger at a word.
Believe it or not, those are really five randomly selected words, and I would have used any combination in my example. In this case I got five charged emothional words, but they might have been very different. These words, when put together start to imply a meaning and maybe tell a story. For example, maybe a young girl was in a relationship that her prudish parents didn't like, they wanted to send her to a therapist. The girl being young and frightened imagined that she might be put through shock therapy, so she ran away.
Nightmareartist said that there is no meaning and that the elements were simply chosen because they are interesting. That is neglecting that all visual elements have a meaning. By choosing to use certain elements, an artist starts to say something. If I said "Look at that fat pig", it would say very different things about me if I said it at a dinner buffet, or if I said it at a farm. In one case I might be rude and socially obnoxious, in the other case I might be evaluating the quality of livestock. The comments reflect on me, and tell whoever I am communicating with something about me.
I just demonstrated that randomly picked vocabulary could have strong, unintended meanings, and I also demonstrated that vocabulary reflects on the artist. It is nearly as non-sensical to pick vocabulary just because i like it. To just put elements together without considering their releationship to each other and the viewer is doing your art and viewer a dis-service.
Your elements are great in this piece, but they would be even better if you had some selective thought process behind putting them there. Worse, you might put elements together that might be offensive to some people. For example, an artist might randomly put red, white and green stripes in the background with a sleeping monkey in the foreground with a whiskey bottle broken on the floor. To you, this might be interesting elements to randomly put together. To others, you might be suggesting that mexicans are lazy drunken monkeys.
To not consider the meaning of the elements is saying that communication isn't important. Saying communication isn't important is saying that the viewer isn't important. If the viewer isn't important, there is no reason to show people your art. "because it is fun to look at" is a good enough reason to show people posters of kittens stuck on screen doors. "Tethered Sphere" is not a kitten stuck on a screen door. It is a well executed, thought provoking piece. The skill and imagery demonstrated in that piece is too good to be saddled with that explanation. Respect your art by being careful what you put in it. Respect your viewer by caring what you show them. Respect yourself by describing your art respectfully.
I actually believe that nightmareartist actually has considered the elemants and actually does have some level of understanding of the meaning of the elements put together in "Tethered Planet". Maybe not an agenda, but definately a general feeling that she wants to communicate. I also believe that it is easier to say that a piece was simply done to look good. "Tethered Planet" deserves a better explanation than that. To say that the elements were put together without meaning makes the piece about as relevant as one of those "paintings" done by an elephant or cat. It is much more relevant than that. At least I believe so.
Nightmareartist, I just dumped a whole lot of academic art talk on you. I am doing so because I respect your work and think it deserves more than you are giving it for an explanation.
Ah yes. There are so many ways I can respond to this. No. There is not always something to get.
I stand by what I said. Let's revisit that for a moment. I said that my surrealism pieces are just fun to look at. I don't owe my audience an explanation. If art needs clarification or justification or an excuse for being it's failed. This piece stands on it's own. It doesn't need my help. It has it's own life.
Not every piece of art has to be PROFOUND. Not every piece must MOVE the viewer. Not every piece needs to be a STATEMENT.
I know that art is just another language full of nouns, verbs and adjectives. I said that I wanted an interesting juxtaposition of elements. You can not pull five words out of the dictionary to achieve that. But you can spin an interesting story. You did.
All elements in the picture were consciously chosen. I have ignored nothing. Five different people will come away with five different impressions due to their own experiences. Some may like it, some may yawn, still others may scratch their heads. All of these impressions are valid and I don't have a problem with any of them. Not even yours.
Let's address this "disservice to my audience" concept. If someone is offended by Tethered Sphere, they are reaching. The example you used is also reaching. No one would create such an image as you suggested unless the purpose was to offend. If I wanted to offend someone, that would be clear. If I wanted to be profound, or move the viewer or make statement, that would also have been clear.
There is no disrespect here. There is no explanation needed. There is no lack of relevance or of communication. There is only a cool piece to look at.
Thanks for taking the time to think about it. I agree with you completely. There are all kinds of art. And many just stand alone as visual experiences. And there is not always something to get. In "tethered sphere", the elements chosen are so specific that it begs for interpretation. I just think that the artist should be aware of that.
Of course not all art has to be profound. Of course, not all art has to make a statement. My art definately doesn't. Some of my art tells stories, some of my pieces are open for interpretation, and some is just pretty (or not so pretty).
As for "Tethered Sphere", I knew that your elements were chosen for a reason. They do have meaning. What inspired my response was the simple statement "there is nothing to get". I respect the piece enough to think that the comment was too flippant for the quality and symbolism presented in the piece.
If you said; "All elements in the picture were consciously chosen. I have ignored nothing. Five different people will come away with five different impressions due to their own experiences. Some may like it, some may yawn, still others may scratch their heads. All of these impressions are valid and I don't have a problem with any of them.", as you did in your response, I wouldn't have had the same thoughts. It is more thoughtful about your piece than "There is nothing to get".
Anyway, I am happy to see a discussion about art and visual vocabulary. Hopefully my coments are welcome, and I didn't scare anyone away. This is all meant to be a conversation inspiring critique.
Not a problem Sketch. This group is called critiques after all. That makes it by definition "An analysis or assessment of something" which is all you did.
I wouldn't have joined the group if I couldn't take the heat.
