Praeterita

That's the problem: I can't. Leave a picture alone, that is. I may have spoiled at least one of the small and large studies that I posted about before, but as I always say to students, you have to go as far as you can and risk spoiling something, so you know when to rein it in the next time. For the top, smaller one, I used India ink and a fine nib to draw lots of spidery lines, before collaging some more poured acrylic shapes on top. For the bottom, larger picture, I drew freely with red airbrush pigment from the bottle, then went back in with a brush and the pen-nib again. This is where I may have gone too far. 

Number 101 in a continuing series of short talks on individual works of art. This time it's about a painting by New York painter Wangechi Mutu . Click here to see previous videos in the series.

Is it the case that an artist just creates in a vacuum, with no knowledge of the art that came before? Is it really true that it's better just to make your work, whether it be fiction, film, or painting, and not "spoil" or "taint" yourself by getting bogged down in the work of the past? Should you, when you go to college to study any of those arts, be prepared to consider the history of your chosen medium in an analytical way, or should you just learn how to hold a brush, focus a camera, and write a scene, and not bother with all that old stuff? Still from Federico Fellini's "I Vitelloni," 1953 It's an argument that is pertinent to the Film and Video Department of Columbia College Chicago at the moment, which as part of its academic prioritization process is facing the elimination of its Cinema Studies from the curriculum. Department Chair Bruce Sheridan, who I mentioned in my last blog post about the superb film/live orchestra event la...

I went to a great event last night at Columbia College Chicago: excerpts from the films "The Piano" and "The Reader", plus three 5 minute student films, all accompanied by a live orchestra. It took place in the movie studio space (big, cavernous, but acoustically good, believe it or not) of Columbia's prize-winning new media arts building. There were three screens, the central one showing the movies, the other two showing the orchestra, via a live relay from two cameras positioned on either side of the auditorium. In front was the 25 piece orchestra -- FulcrumPoint , an ensemble dedicated to new music, and led by the charismatic Stephen Burns. For "The Reader", they played Nico Muhly's music, which was surprisingly conservative for him, though the fact that it sounded like a tasteful movie soundtrack is not to detract from the experience of hearing it live. The student films had scores composed by Columbia students (who have since graduated a...

Here's what happened yesterday on the YouTube channel for the Meditations on Art series: See in the top right hand corner, where it says "Video Views"? It just passed the 100,000 mark. Again, compared to the cute cat videos to which I am addicted, it's a drop in the ocean. But in my particular bucket of YouTube water, it's significant. Thanks you to all and anyone who has watched and listened to these short talks. See them here .

Part 16 of an interview series in which I invite artists to respond to six questions about art, process, and creativity    ( Part 1 ,  Part 2 ,  Part 3 , Part 4 ,  Part 5 ,  Part 6 ,  Part 7 ,  Part 8 ,  Part 9 ,  Part 10 ,  Part 11 ,  Part 12 ,   Part 13 ,   Part 14 , Part 15 ) . Today's artist is Hazel Ang , a Canadian-born illustrator who now lives and works in Germany. "Suspense" Philip Hartigan : What medium/media do you chiefly use, and why? Hazel Ang : From 9 am to 6 pm I mainly use the computer, as I make vector illustrations, technical drawings, product renderings, and infographics for my day job. For my own personal projects I use acrylics, colour pencils and ink, and oils on paper or wood. It basically depends on what the piece calls for. Philip Hartigan : What piece are you currently working on? Hazel Ang : I’m working on a self portrait, as well as a sketchbook series of visually narr...

I've been experimenting with non-toxic printmaking for a few years, and have even started teaching printmaking classes in the summer using these principles. What does "non-toxic" mean? It means that you try to replace all the chemicals used in the traditional printmaking processes -- many of which are now known to damage your health, as well as causing damage to the environment -- with agents that are safe to the user and can disperse harmlessly in the local water supply. As I've converted my own processes, I've discovered that nothing is really completely non-toxic. There always seems to be a residual pollution, but compared to the acids and tars that were formerly used, the difference is huge. In terms of what the new materials can give you in terms of mark-making, I have also found that certain things are easier to replace than others. The Akua range of soy-based printmaking inks, for example: I found it a little difficult at first to judge the correct amoun...