Your discussion with @potvinmax reminds me of a spat I had once with a Painter with a Degree in Arts. We were a gang who were out in a village painting plein air, and I felt like changing and exaggerating the colors. "Look", I said, "I've done something in German expressionist style". This guy practically exploded, called me ignorant and said I didn't have any idea of what I was doing or what expressionism was, and he just kept on going about it. I said I'd just made a playful experiment and had taken inspiration from some painting by Emil Nolde that I'd whipped up on my phone. In fact to this day I like to do color switching and if someone asks why, I'll still say I'm inspired by German expressionism. I don't pretend to be educated about it but I feel an emotional connection to that movement. So call me a fool, I don't care.
Color swapping or exaggerating, in the case of a guy doing regular plien aire painting, would get no grief from me. And if he used the word "expressionism" I'd probably leave him alone. So: apples and oranges. Like I said in the video, I've been following Potvin for years, and as I showed in the twitter threads, he did not say "expressionism". Its just that I can read a painting like other people read letters, particularly when I'm familiar with a guy's work.
@pr44pr44 So bear with me: in a sense then, you're even _worse_ than that arrogant guy I spoke about because even if I wouldn't _call_ my painting "expressionist" you'd still judge it like you did with Potvin. You seem to say it's a dead end to use the same devices that expressionists used, without somehow first magically reliving the historical movement and its struggles. But why can't artists today walk some of the same paths again and explore? Wasn't for example the neoclassical movement rehash and recycling?
hi Paul.. this is such a great topic ..I've given much thought over the years.. the label "expressionism" leads to misunderstandings first of all... I can't stand this label.. really it's about experimentation when the painter is authentic... a spontaneous burst of improvisation... the problem comes when the painter is either inauthentic or doesn't have the necessary strong foundation of skill & draughtsmanship to fall back on.. to carry one through, so to speak.. one can't just decide "I'm an expressionist".. it's like comparing thelonious monk with chopin.... the excitement of the unknown & the freedom to venture into the unknown involves some kind of courage.. BUT that can only be done AFTER the painter has acquired so many years of experience that skill , draughtsmanship has already been embedded into the subconcious .. inexperienced painters are using their own self expression as the definition of "expressionism...".. the word itself is very misleading.. bottom line ? one must learn to draw like the old masters before improv' & spontaneity can happen authentically.....
Your discussion with @potvinmax reminds me of a spat I had once with a Painter with a Degree in Arts. We were a gang who were out in a village painting plein air, and I felt like changing and exaggerating the colors. "Look", I said, "I've done something in German expressionist style". This guy practically exploded, called me ignorant and said I didn't have any idea of what I was doing or what expressionism was, and he just kept on going about it. I said I'd just made a playful experiment and had taken inspiration from some painting by Emil Nolde that I'd whipped up on my phone. In fact to this day I like to do color switching and if someone asks why, I'll still say I'm inspired by German expressionism. I don't pretend to be educated about it but I feel an emotional connection to that movement. So call me a fool, I don't care.
Color swapping or exaggerating, in the case of a guy doing regular plien aire painting, would get no grief from me. And if he used the word "expressionism" I'd probably leave him alone.
So: apples and oranges.
Like I said in the video, I've been following Potvin for years, and as I showed in the twitter threads, he did not say "expressionism".
Its just that I can read a painting like other people read letters, particularly when I'm familiar with a guy's work.
@pr44pr44 So bear with me: in a sense then, you're even _worse_ than that arrogant guy I spoke about because even if I wouldn't _call_ my painting "expressionist" you'd still judge it like you did with Potvin. You seem to say it's a dead end to use the same devices that expressionists used, without somehow first magically reliving the historical movement and its struggles. But why can't artists today walk some of the same paths again and explore? Wasn't for example the neoclassical movement rehash and recycling?
hi Paul.. this is such a great topic ..I've given much thought over the years..
the label "expressionism" leads to misunderstandings first of all...
I can't stand this label..
really it's about experimentation when the painter is authentic...
a spontaneous burst of improvisation...
the problem comes when the painter is either inauthentic or doesn't have the necessary strong foundation of skill & draughtsmanship to fall back on..
to carry one through, so to speak..
one can't just decide "I'm an expressionist"..
it's like comparing thelonious monk with chopin....
the excitement of the unknown & the freedom to venture into the unknown involves some kind of courage..
BUT that can only be done AFTER the painter has acquired so many years of experience that skill , draughtsmanship has already been embedded into the subconcious ..
inexperienced painters are using their own self expression as the definition of "expressionism..."..
the word itself is very misleading..
bottom line ? one must learn to draw like the old masters before improv' & spontaneity can happen authentically.....
we are all fools💯😅
Are we now in post-postmodernism, meta-modernism, new sincerity?
we are now in Terminal Stupidity
absurdism😳🖌...
@@pr44pr44 😂