[This Is Not Here]

I'm currently doing a Fine Art degree in London as some of you may know, and for the past few monthes I've been doing a fair bit of painting, and I have to say the paintings I've done have been the least satisfying and downright worst I have ever done. Mainly because my heart's not in it anymore, and my opinions on the value of the painted image have shifted dramatically and irrivocably.

So whats the big deal? Well, not a hell of alot to you. The world needs fewer painters, and so that might work out well for you. But personally it feels like a massive loss, of a story and a potential cut short - though, theres also the feeling this whole year has been building up to be giving up painting, and I feel releived and kind of excited for the remainder of my course.
Essentially paintings been the only real thing I've been complimented on in the past, and I've enjoyed the attention so much to a level of complacency. I am expected to continue a centurys old tradition of painters in my family and when I told my mum I didn't want to do it anymore the other day, it was if I'd just said I'd killed and ate a baby.

So whats disallusioned me with painting is this. It's what almost all art students think they SHOULD be doing. In order to validate themselves as artists and art students they beleive painting is expected of them, and GOOD painting at that. So alot of my fellow students churn out amazing paintings. They are, and I won't deny this, painted to an incredible level of skill. But the amount of portrait painters on my course is rediculous, and people are wowed by the skill in them, but it fustrates me that no one can see the the painting says ABSOLUTELY nothing about anything. A portrait of someone's uncle just says 'this is my uncle'. In any other media, where the mastery and skill of painting is not there to distract from this, this total lack of conviction, statement or emotion would not be accepted.

And the worst thing is, for the past few years I've bought into this. Whilst I've been on this forum and stuff talking about the beauty of experimentation, alternative media and claimed art to be totally about emotional conviction, I've been pushing paint around a canvas and making these ultimately empty and totally forced paintings.

So for the foreseeable future I refuse to indulge in the big headedness associated with painting, the quiet competition and snobbery involved in this medium. I'm going into installation and I'm working on something now which I beleive will be far more impressive than anything I could ever paint.

Sorry to rant. Verbal Diarrhoea

[Rob Instigator]

I agree and understand with much of your rant above, but I have to tell you, painters are only image-makers. we make images. an image of your "uncle" is just as valid and can be just a beautiful and interesting t contemplate as an abstraction by dekooning or a hyperrealistic painting by robert williams.

You should take a sabbatical, that's for sure. It is what I do. I left oil painting behind a decade ago, painted in watercolors and gouachem then focused solely on ink with brush or pen, on papper, and now I am back excited and hype about the possibilities in oil painting again.

I think that, in a time when images can be and are manipulated and "fabricated" to such a huge extent, painters have an especially important role to play.

creative people such as you need to be abl to express their creativity in any way they see fit, and you should maintain your skillz with the paint because you never ever know when the urge will hit you again.

I have been going to art galleries and museum shows and openings and a million other art events for the past 15 years. I have seen every media and style imaginable, and I can honestly tell you that, no matter the prevalence of digital media and photography, it is the painted works that seem to inspire and grab the attention of the audiences. People seem to get lost in paintings in a way they do not with photography, or sculpture, or mixed media stuff, or installations.

photographs do not seem to inspire the same level of contemplation. People are so used to them and so "sophisticated" in their experience twith photography that a cursory glance is all that is needed.

I am just babling now. I drank some cofefeee.

either way bro, best of luck. make art for yourself.

[jimbrim]

I suppose if your hearts no longer in it, giving up temporarily seems like a wise idea, but defiently start painting when you get the inspiration and feel up to it. And of course, you don't have to limit yourself to painting, there's plenty of other areas to explore, which you know already.

I've recently decided not to pursue an art/illustration degree basically for the same reasons. During my foundation I found the briefs pretty intense, and if I'm not motivated enough to continue a course wherein you have to be conistently creative, it just seems silly. But for the most part, getting a job in that field is a tough world for a lazy twat like myself.

Anyway, best of luck.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

 

taking the hitler approach to painting I see? I say continue on as ever, if art was easy, then everybody'd be doin it..

[Rob Instigator]

right now job wize it is a tough world for anyone, especially lazy asses.

[jimbrim]

too true!

[The Lung]

I can see painters at uni being big headed but you dont just have to do portraits; you can do anything with paint. I've seen your work and you have a really good painting style. Try and experiment with it in a project and i'm sure you'd make something really interesting.

I think it would be a shame to waste an obvious talent.

[This Is Not Here]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

taking the hitler approach to painting I see? I say continue on as ever, if art was easy, then everybody'd be doin it..

It's not a question of easy or difficult, personally I find it alot easier than most people. It's a question of whether theres a point or not, whether I am getting my ideas and aims across. And the answers pretty much no. I don't think I've any real interest in myself image-making for the sake of it, though I still greatly appreciate it.

Originally Posted by This Is Not Here

But the amount of portrait painters on my course is rediculous, and people are wowed by the skill in them, but it fustrates me that no one can see the the painting says ABSOLUTELY nothing about anything. A portrait of someone's uncle just says 'this is my uncle'. In any other media, where the mastery and skill of painting is not there to distract from this, this total lack of conviction, statement or emotion would not be accepted.

Sometimes I wonder what the artists really think of the people whose portrait they're painting. I don't know how much soul one can expect to squeeze out of Kate Moss, but it can't be that much, as photogenic as she is.

[!@#$%!]

if you have a talent for painting, it might be a risky move to ditch it all; but then again, being oppressed by a century of ancestors can be quite stifling.

go ahead and rebel-- school is if anything a place where you can experiment with other things. it's supposed to broaden your mind and challenge you to try new things. my guess is that you might eventually get back to painting once you feel you can bring something fresh/new to it, rather than being stuck in a rut-- if this is a natural talent you have, it will not let you give it up. challenge yourself and enjoy the mess.

picasso did theatre set designs, sculpture, and ceramics, besides painting. matisse fucked with paper cutouts. on the other hand, alexander calder was from a family of engineers and ditched that to make mobile sculptures. maybe you'll jump forward or sideways or across the street, but it's cool you don't want to jump back.

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by This Is Not Here

I refuse to indulge in the big headedness associated with painting, the quiet competition and snobbery involved in this medium.

installation is just as ridden with those kinds of things as painiting is.
it would be a shame to let your abilities go to waste, however if you aren't feeling it then maybe try something else, there's more to painting than portraits of your uncle (or if your art school is anything like mine, then pictures of a friend smoking), installation is just as hemmed in by convention as painting is, actually probably more so. i've never seen your work so i don't know if it is appropriate to say this, but maybe you need to rethink your approach to painting rather than give it up? you will surely come back to it in the future and you will kick yourself for allowing your skills to gather rust.

[the ikara cult]

Ive always subscribed to the idea that art school is a massively awful idea for anyone who really needs to record themselves. Mainly because it creates a societal element to it, it creates that feedback loop that can become dissatifying when you realise youre not doing yourself right by listening to other people who are in the same system as you are.

Thats probably why i fell out with everyone doing A-Level Drama and could never join a band, but thats just me. Stick with yourself, dump the painting, nothing wrong with that, you dont owe anyone but yourself your efforts and passion. Switch mediums, start doing music (even if youre shit like me), and ive never met a decent person from Surbiton so move out!

[demonrail666]

As much as, like T&B says, you're likely to feel hemmed in by convention regardless of whether you're working in paint, installation, video, whatever, there's certainly no harm in branching out and seeing what you can do in other media. Just promise one thing: you won't get into performance art. I've yet to meet a single performance artist I haven't wanted to stab to death almost immediately.

[phoenix]

I believe you will reconsider yr decision in the not too distant future. Maybe a year or two maybe less. Probably once you leave studies, and aren't around people trying to perfect/improve certain techniques as quickly as they can within the years of their study.

Everyone goes through 'there is no point to my work' phases, 'therefore I need to take a step back'. It is normal. good luck though! perhaps it will allow you to pursue another interest you hadn't yet looked into..

[phoenix]

^^ my post sounds like some kind of psychic reading print out.

[Norma J]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

I think that, in a time when images can be and are manipulated and "fabricated" to such a huge extent, painters have an especially important role to play.

I have been going to art galleries and museum shows and openings and a million other art events for the past 15 years. I have seen every media and style imaginable, and I can honestly tell you that, no matter the prevalence of digital media and photography, it is the painted works that seem to inspire and grab the attention of the audiences. People seem to get lost in paintings in a way they do not with photography, or sculpture, or mixed media stuff, or installations.

photographs do not seem to inspire the same level of contemplation. People are so used to them and so "sophisticated" in their experience twith photography that a cursory glance is all that is needed.

How is an image 'fabricated'? are you referring to digital art?

I think different mediums inspire and provoke different things within different people. No particular style or way of making art is more important or of greater worth than any other. Photography can inspire and obtain ones attention just as well as a painting can.

[Death & the Maiden]

I do art at my school, and we have our Body of Work due in September. We can do whatever we want in any media, but everyone seems to think they have to have a concept which addresses the world's problem or is thought provoking in some way - such as "society controls you", "women are perceived as objects" and "today's society compared to the 50s/60s/70s/80s". I want to do something that interests me, so I'm doing lino printed portraits of the actors who have played the Doctor in Docter Who. Only the teachers seem to think it's a good idea, all the other students think it isn't a legitimate concept. So, anyway, kind of the opposite to TINH's situation.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Death & the Maiden

So, anyway, kind of the opposite to TINH's situation.

maybe its cuz the english are always worried about what's proper, proper, proper. dr who = not proper. but you drunk aussies dont give a shit, right? good for you i say. the aussies ive met have always been cool-- some a bit dense, but always cool. so-- enjoy your freedoms.

eh, maybe im talking out of my ass, but it's the internet.

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by Death & the Maiden

I do art at my school, and we have our Body of Work due in September. We can do whatever we want in any media, but everyone seems to think they have to have a concept which addresses the world's problem or is thought provoking in some way - such as "society controls you", "women are perceived as objects" and "today's society compared to the 50s/60s/70s/80s". I want to do something that interests me, so I'm doing lino printed portraits of the actors who have played the Doctor in Docter Who. Only the teachers seem to think it's a good idea, all the other students think it isn't a legitimate concept. So, anyway, kind of the opposite to TINH's situation.

I agree with the teachers, and the other students work sounds trite to say the least.

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

maybe its cuz the english are always worried about what's proper, proper, proper. dr who = not proper. but you drunk aussies dont give a shit, right? good for you i say. the aussies ive met have always been cool-- some a bit dense, but always cool. so-- enjoy your freedoms.

eh, maybe im talking out of my ass, but it's the internet.

dr who is nothing if not proper, particularly if you're talking about the tom baker and john pertwee eras