Why would an artist need to have a unique approach to drawing? This is the first question I’m asking myself during the last couple of years. Why does artist keep searching for new ways of expressing?
Artist Vija Celmins finds her inspiration in a surface of the stones. Inclusions in the rock give a complex effect that our brain can adapt for different purposes.
But it also can be that a painting or drawing itself can trigger to new dimensions. This is how David Lynch came through the own creation to the cinema.
In this both cases, artists found a solution or the exiting way of realisation their own projects. But the difference in these two cases is that Celmins found a technical solution for a series of works in nature, and Lynch saw the potential of painting in motion out of himself and later he applied this approach as a solution for next works.
It seems to me that a "searching brain" of the artist is an almost normal state, as a motivation is bigger. Through daily work, an artist can get out of own ideas a unique solution but to get the inspiration from nature I think it is different. Nature was there before us, it is older than mankind but we are the only creatures who can create something devoid of meaning and not bearing the need because in nature, everything exists with the purpose, that is, cause and effect. Of course, if you think about how it is more interesting to depict clouds, you can be inspired by spills of seawater spots on the sand or in the relief of a concrete wall, but does this solution, inspired by natural objects, is unique and creative? I can’t agree at this point.
With the example of Lynch I want to develop my own samples further and challenge them.
Comments