going more non-figurative

[KatyL]

Since my goal is to eventually do outdoor work, and be consistently "hired" by those who want such art, I have decided to chuck my animal and human (figurative) for awhile and see how I do on non-representational art.

I really have wanted to do my work in a freerer way, not really slave to some pre-existing form.

So, anyway. I think I will have some fun with this. Hope I do anyway.

Katy

[rika]

I presume you have done non-representational pieces. Any examples? How do you plan to get "consistently hired"? from what I heard, it's tough to break into that small pool of sculptors...but they get all the jobs once they do.

[KatyL]

I don't know even if that particular side of it can be done. Like I say, it is a goal. I worked for 7 years with someone in the small pool, so I have the wire and burlap techniques down pat. It may not happen again, sometimes lightning does not strike twice, but I sure know about attracting it. In addition, right now I am acquainted with some people who are in the pool, getting local outdoor art jobs. I will ask them what they feel when I have worked up my samples.

As far as examples, I'm working on it, is all I can say. I have to do some experimental pieces to see where I feel the best. Right now I am working on a few free form type shapes, along the lines of my water paintings, which you have not seen.

(Frankly, the only art I actually sell is abstract free form paintings. The realistic sculptures were the deviations, not the norm.)

All I know right now is that I am a bit fragmented as far as a possible future, so I want to get some alternate works on the books as well. I want to take my ideas of motion and imbalance into another level.

[chris 71]

look forward to seeing what you come up with KatyL something tells me its gonna be good

[evaldart]

The perceived "freedom" of working abstractly implies an ease and a spontaneous facility that is not actually there. It has been my experience, as one who has done large-scale non-objective and figurative work that the "modes" of approach-to-form differ very little. Figures must always be composed volumes and masses, arranged in accordance with the very same aesthetic sensibilities that direct the gestures, stances and anthropic dynamics of a created thing that refers, no matter how "realistic" or expressionistic, to the human body.

As always, you will find your growth in the throes of process, which only cares to attend to the moments DURING the episode of creativity. It is the passive thinker in us who assesses (too-much?) how the thing "looks" as we rest between those active bursts. We have a memory, though, to keep that dreamer in place with recalled physicalities.

[KatyL]

I'll give you some background...

As I have been sculpting the horse & human shapes, I have mentally engaged more in the technicalities of form, shape, pose, surface. The fact that the figures look "human" or "animal" has only been an "inconvenience" to my actual desires for my output.

It is not that I think I can "get away" with working less or something. Actually, the opposite-- I feel that I can engage my imagination more.

In art school, I mainly did "extreme closeups" of objects. My biggest sellers have been paintings of water ripples. I don't even think they are exactly "accurate." I have always been more interested in the "shapes" of things, whether rendered on paper, or another form. Although I feel I have talent to become a good figurative artist, I need to stretch my boundaries some and see how that feels before I commit the next 10 years to something.

Another thing I want to start to do is bas relief. Possibly fiberglas. I really would like to get away from paint entirely.

[Mr. Malloy]

Hi, I know what you mean. Ironically I have the reverse, Now I wish to fabricate more "figure" works of human form or any other representational type. since art school I have blown away all the bounderies and been praised for quality work (including in school). But now I wish to hone down the skills to a different genre. And this will feed my creative needs in a different way. Best, Malloy

[evaldart]

Malloy, good to see you posting again. I always liked your thrust. What have you been making lately, man?!!

[cdjordjievski]

Hi Katy,
You made the statement “I have decided to chuck my animal and human (figurative) for awhile and see how I do on non-representational art”. I am not sure if that is the most prolific approach. If you are familiar with the animal and human anatomy it is an enormous advantage that other people do not have. Instead of giving up it may be interesting if you focus on it some more and use it to your advantage see where it is going to take you, develop, evolve from that fundamental knowledge that you already have.

I’ll give you few examples of what I mean.
If you look at the drawings and painting of Alberto Giacometti you will notice that he is very familiar with human anatomy. For his sculptures he was using live models and yet his sculptures are not figurative enough in the traditional sense like for example Rodin or Michelangelo.

Amadeo Modigliani, his early work was far more traditional in regard to human anatomy that the later work. He used his knowledge of human anatomy and evolved. His work was still figurative but not traditional figurative like for example Rubens or Leaonardo.

Maderdo Rosso is another good example. His early wax portraits were more anatomical than the later ones. He was more selective as far as how he is going to work the sculpture but at the same time he was making sure it was there.

The early drawings of Barbara Hepworth and especially Henry Moore clearly suggest that they knew human anatomy well. If I am not mistaking there is a place near Leeds in England that has some very interesting natural rock formations. I remember someone mentioning (I do not know how true it is) that Henry Moore was going there and studying the rocks. Eventually he merged his knowledge of human anatomy with his study of the natural rock formation and the rest is history.

Picasso, his early work in 1900’s the blue and the rose period was figurative, realistic. I believe that his knowledge in realism was foundation that helped him evolve and venture in cubism. Someone (I am not sure if it was Picasso or someone else) did a drawing exercise. They drew a bull with large number of lines and then they drew the same bull with few lines. I believe the comment was made that it was far more difficult to say the same with less.

You are familiar with horse anatomy. Excellent example is Marion Marini who knew horse anatomy real well. At the beginning he was far more realistic with his horses and riders. Later, he developed, evolved with his work. I believe that his sculptures are powerful because his knowledge in horse anatomy empowered him to emphasize on the important things and pull back on the unimportant.

Since you are familiar with horse anatomy good exercise maybe to set up three same armatures and work on a same horse trying to capture what is most important to make that horse a horse. Work on one for one hour, on the second one fifteen minutes and the last one five minutes. Stand back and observe, you never know some lights may go off and point in some direction.

Good luck and good night.

[KatyL]

Hi, I see the point in these answers. The whole thing is about getting out of one's comfort level and growing and expanding (etc.) I felt all along when I was doing the horses and people that I was really honing into the "feeling" of rounding something with a plane, or sanding something, or making a perfect "shape." Thus, I wanted to do sculptures involving only these things. Certainly this could all be a false lead. From my reading, and from my personal observation, I see more "modern" sculpture in parks and public places, and less horses and people. You do see some but they are from the early 19th century or "depression art". The whole movement in art has been to move away from the representational. Well, I feel as an artist, I have the responsibility to explore this path. It may end up that I will be perfectly happy doing figurative tabletop sculpture-- who knows?

So here are my first experimental pieces. I do not intend on finishing them (adding a final layer) until I have several to do at the same time. I have one more on the stand right now, and I am finishing up the mold for the "girl." And one small left over horse. I will be going out truck driving for a year, so I will not be working on anything all year. I need to make some money.

[KatyL]

By the way. Some of the water paintings: Here are a few. You can see I have been doing free form semi-abstract paintings. If I could turn these into sculptures, I would.

[evaldart]

I think those are very fine paintings K. And I dont see any reason why you cant put to test the things you gained by doing them into sculpture. The problem will be that the "spatial" issues of painting ans sculpture are not reconcilable. This is because the things you do "around" and Between" your organic forms in the painting have everything to do with the significance of those forms (and this includes to a great degree, color). I would say that greater consideration must be given to the voids as these visual motivations get approached in our (3rd) dimension. But paradoxially the "betweens" and distances and closenesses and proximities of compositional bodies are not going to be demanding enough. So you must give them substance by giving them "work" to do...in the form of "bites". We sculptors often dont realize how much we are about removal and reduction...but we do it mostly with thought.

I think you will accomplish this transition very well. It really did help to see you paintings to become familiar with your breadth...and breadth is crucial.

[KatyL]

Thanks for the reply Evaldart

I think that was why I thought more in terms of molecular construction. Something like Brownian motion-- the seemingly random path of atomic particles. One thing obvious after observing water (waves) and bubbles is that they behave in formulaic ways. One thing I read about "modern" art as opposed to "traditional" art is that it is based on mathematical concepts. My interpretation is that they "divide" the basic structures of reality, and more or less report on them. Many kinetic sculptures are about "behavior" of the physical. In a sense, the depiction of the path of a hawk would be a less literal interpretation of "Hawk" then a sculpture, or picture of the actual bird. You are probably trying to imagine what you are going to do for your Noah sculpture, but you can do it in a literal way (a depiction of a man) or a non literal way (some abstract pattern that has a connection to the idea of surviving floods).

Thanks. Katy

[evaldart]

Yes, if it was the task I set for myself I would delightedly make the non-objective sculpture version of Noah. Figures need very little urging to become just biomorphic stretches of gesture.
I, personally, hesitate to make historical divisions and I also resist adherance to linear theories laid out by the categorizers and compartmentlizers who would have us all bowing to our predecessors (bowing to their accounts). But if their thoughts are random, preposterous, outlandish and fabricated enough they can indeed be worth consideration (thinkers are no less burdened to improve by their uniqueness than we of the more "plastic" arts).

I think you are on the right track by the imagining of the microscopic, the sub atomic...which eventually feels like its opposite; the cosmic or the galactic.

[KatyL]

From what I have seen those "chosen" by "experts" to exemplify art, are those who break free of their predecessors and traditions. This idea of "leaving" an established path is in direct opposition with those who benefit from "staying" in an established path. In no other field is "rebellion" seen as a virtue.

[ironman]

Hi Katyl,,
I don't think that it's necessarily a rebellion against anything but that it's finding your own unique voice, expressing that voice and having the understanding that what you're doing is valid work and your own personal expression.

[evaldart]

Jeff! Good to hear your voice. I'll be in NYC to install a piece end of the month. Meet me at McSorelys.

[KatyL]

Originally Posted by ironman

Hi Katyl,,
I don't think that it's necessarily a rebellion against anything but that it's finding your own unique voice, expressing that voice and having the understanding that what you're doing is valid work and your own personal expression.

Man, I wish I still lived in New Mexico.

[evaldart]

Yes, Oddist, I have another sketch which imagines another moment....after the flood, which will not need to be informed by the task of building a boat. The dove does figure in nicely (as opposed to a giraffe) ; but I see the whole animal thing as a simple device for assuring the impossibility of things.

Besides, the receding waters only brought bigger challenges. Beginning again, after a cosmic sterilizing - facing the clean slate - the blank canvas - the tabula-rasa....nothing is more difficult that THAT for the individual of great will; because creating is hard and destroying is easy. Ask any artist.

[Owen Weng]

Hi Katyl, I think it's unnecessary for you to chuck the representative sculpting style to work on outdoor works.
Many of monument are representative style, right ?

Originally Posted by KatyL

Since my goal is to eventually do outdoor work, and be consistently "hired" by those who want such art, I have decided to chuck my animal and human (figurative) for awhile and see how I do on non-representational art.

I really have wanted to do my work in a freerer way, not really slave to some pre-existing form.

So, anyway. I think I will have some fun with this. Hope I do anyway.

Katy

[Richard Smith]

The famous jazz saxophonist Sonney Rawlins once said that to play great jazz you had to learn everything about music and then forget it. I'd say that if you want to make great non-figurative sculpture, first learn everything about the human body and then forget it. Rich

[KatyL]

Things have changed since I posted last

1) I am now living back in New Mexico. Clovis! It happened suddenly. I got a job to pay the rent, and moved out there.

2) I am continuing on with animals-- My next piece will be a cow though, not a horse.