still on the topic **edited**

Still on the topic of art, I've been thinking a lot about what it is about those pieces (and others like them) that irks me so much. Here are some of my thoughts on the subject, written in what I am sure will end up being a stream of conscious, totally unorganized fashion.

Something that I continually wrestle with is whether or not I feel comfortable labeling myself as an artist. While others have told me that they consider me one, I feel funny calling myself by that name.

What is it that I appreciate in others work? In no particular order, I appreciate; skill, talent, ability, color choice, quality in craftsmanship, and the ever mysterious, undefinable aesthetic quality - basically is it pretty?

I can't say that I look at an artist's work and take into consideration any emotion conveyed or created by viewing the painting, photograph, sculpture, etc. And it is this fact that makes me doubt that I have the true spirit of an artist.

In doing my own work I strive to perfect the same qualities that I admire in others. When constructing a stained glass panel for example, I want to make something that draws the eye to it and keeps it there. I design the piece so that there is a minimal number of lead lines, I feel that stained glass tends to be plagued by too many lines. I choose the colors so that they look good together. I continually strive to perfect my soldering to create smooth lines. I do not (at least not that I am aware of) attempt to put my emotions and feelings into what I am making.

There are plenty of so called classic and generally well like artists throughout history that I don't particularly like, but I can appreciate. For example I could do without Renoir, Degas and dare I say Rembrandt (gasp!) . I just don't really like their styles, which goes back to the mysterious and undefinable quality of aesthetics. But, I CAN appreciate their work because their paintings showcase great ability, talent and a skillful mastery of their medium.

With this in mind then, I can NOT appreciate three blocks on a wall or a single line on a blank canvas, because to ME, I don't like the style, I don't find it pleasing to the eye and it does not exhibit skill or talent because my kid could do that. And don't get me wrong, I know it's not supposed to be about the skill, it's supposed to be about the statement being made, which my kid couldn't do (even though she is a genius;) ).

I guess when it all comes down to it, my personal definition of art does not include such works as discussed in my previous post. I am not against people thinking outside of the box, I'm rather for it actually, and I do enjoy seeing different things that people come up with. I guess I'm just not a fan of calling it art and sticking it in a museum or charging exorbitant amounts of money for it. So what should it be called and where should it be showcased?? I don't know.

But it seems that maybe my definition of what makes something art, is not the general consensus. Most places you look would probably include the element of emotion, either conveyed or created by a work of art, in their definition. Like I said, this is the big one that I don't include which then raises the question, "without emotion, is it really art?"

I doubt myself as an artist because of this lack of emotion in my definition and execution of art. I think that in the battle between art and craft, I am drifting more to the craft side. But (pay attention, this is important) by craft I do NOT mean plastic canvas kleenex cozies and paint by number kits. I mean skilled craftsmanship, i.e woodworking, carpentry, stained glass etc. The practice of age old trades that are as admired today as they were hundreds of year ago. I am realizing that ultimately, that is what I am interested in practicing. If other people want to call me an artist, that's fine because everyone has their own definition. But I'm still trying to figure it out.

---------------------------------------------------

One last thing that occured to me, and then I'll shut up.

I forgot to add that I think in general, art, as typically defined by most folks, aims to make a statement about something.

Today as I was driving back home from checking the mail, I noticed that the clouds looked really cool set next to the mountains. I thought that it was be a good scene to capture on film, in glass, in watercolor, whatever. But my desire is not to convey any emotion I felt when seeing them. Nor am I trying to make any particular statement. I just thought they looked cool. So what is that? Art? Craft? Who knows.

And maybe who cares. As long as I am happy doing what I am doing and other people might like what I do. Maybe even enough to buy it. That's all that matters.