Any artist’s comment on the technique embarrasses him: how to make the part of the experience in the acquisition of automatisms of the trade. The objective knowledge is mixed with the emotions that accompanied the first steps … And the reflections that did not fail to follow them.
It has always been the basis of my work, and by drawing I do not just mean “know how to draw” or “make lines”. The true invention, this discovery of oneself, involves the expression of the hand in its most sober form, and also the purest. No dressing will give a true consistency to what has no spine. A musical composition cannot be satisfied with the orchestration. Painting cannot be content with matter.
Without the soul of drawing, the work is only a catalog of colors; his matter is a trace that will never become a sign.
Every painter has his “stuff”. When one of these things is practicable by others, we are dealing with a technique. Since we do not attribute the result to the first who has developed it, that the style of the following is freed from the first. This is the case of my technique on wet paper
I would have preferred not to be the first to work this fog that forms the pigment in contact with water. I needed traits, no stains! Any school would have saved me a lot of time. But the only words that I could “glean” claim this phenomenon “impossible” … So I wiped the plasters. The few examples that I have since recommended result in a dismissal. I work on a sheet soaked to heart until it has begun to dry. The vocation of this technique is to be transmitted, and it is for this purpose that I claim it: I fight for a right to the graphic expression, at this time that condemns the drawing to the unique use of advertising! What a mistake!
Since acrylic has almost replaced oil painting, watercolor improves its status. Acrylic is also a painting with water. Like many of my colleagues, I practice several techniques, from drawing to oil painting. I try to adapt my choices to the topics I’m dealing with. The concern for nuance, and the search for graphic purity often incline to paper as a medium, lead pencil and watercolor as materials. The formats are unusual for this “genre” which evokes the travel diary more often than the workshop work in the minds of amateurs.
The reason, the subject
It seems to me essential, unavoidable. For knowledge, for inspiration. Navigating between what I see, and what I am already beginning to glimpse, this is the purpose of the study session. A long synthesis work will follow where very often the laborious sketches of the departure will simply be forgotten. One fine day, a blank sheet will fill itself, as if by magic. The motive will come from within.
No illusion: it is a technique in its own right, even if it has so far found its remuneration in advertising. This is an opportunity to clarify our vocabulary. A work is original above all when its purpose can not be assimilated to any other, when it shows a real invention. Now, the term “original” refers to the medium vulgarly. “As long as it’s handmade, it’s an original! The idea is not necessarily original, but it has no importance! “Result, the market generates painters” chain “when they do not” annealing “. The creation does not find its account, and I am not surprised by the real revolution that is coming. It is undoubtedly the infographic that will initiate the change of manners. Before being a support, the work of art is a creation.
The status of creation through that of the work
An original work can be defined in two ways: by its idea and by its support. But the support can be mass produced from the same idea without bringing any real novelty. The creation must be original before being a product production.
Computer graphics can help persuade the public that invention is primarily in the initial idea, and not in the insistent repetition of the same idea, even on different media. The computer copy of a file is “identical and cheaper”, and the value of the infographic work cannot refer to the support. The notion of “copyright” is likely to be valued, and it will complement that of “original work” by bringing a touch of irony.
This question is one of the cornerstones of conceptual art, which has damaged the status of the medium. I do not think we can fight one excess with another. If the medium can not suffice for the definition of the work, nothing is solved by excluding it.