Kandinsky And Matisse Were Also Lawyers

Two of the most prominent artists of the 20th century were also lawyers: Wassily Kandinsky and Henri Matisse. Nice.

I've also noticed a similarity between the philosophies of two prominent individuals in art and law from the 20th century: art critic, Clement Greenberg, and former United States Supreme Court Justice, Felix Frankfurter: 

In the early 20th century, Justice Frankfurter was asked by a young man how to become a great lawyer. He advised the man not to limit his studies to the law, but to embrace the study of all fields, including history, art, literature, science, sports, culture, and the environment. 

About fifty years later, Clement Greenberg wrote in his essay Esthetic Judgment: To keep on expanding your esthetic taste asks that you keep on expanding and refining your sense of life in general. To further develop your taste in art, he advises that you keep on learning from life apart from art. 

I've had some people doubt me as an artist because I'm also a lawyer. I suppose they felt prejudiced by the assumption that lawyers must be uncreative. Although the craft differs (which is only scratching the surface), I find the practice of art and law to be similar -- they're both an intellectual process of analyzing, deconstructing, conceptualizing, building, revising, etc., based on life apart from art or law. 

I think that Kandinsky and Matisse would agree. 

Here is the latest Intermission painting

Intermission X, 45" x 45", oil, acrylic, canvas, 2016.

Intermission X, 45" x 45", oil, acrylic, canvas, 2016.

The Portraiture Concept

Many of us have probably strolled through halls or white rooms with portrait after portrait of seemingly the same portrait over and over, dulling our overall impression of the concept of portraiture. But if we free our minds of categorizing, historical chronologies, and overbroad groupings, by isolating each work of art as its own entity, then I think the dullness of the portraiture idea disappears. 

I think the concept of portraiture will never vanish as it applies to painting. There is an intrigue with the way a person can interpret and represent another person through lines and colors -- it's organic and human -- something that can't be replaced by machines or any other form of art. I don't mean to say that artists should just repeat what's been done in the past; to the contrary, the challenge remains, as it does with all forms of art, to create something fresh and original. 

Freshness and originality are not defined by mere subject matter. They just require creating something beyond what is known. Whatever that means. Undefined by their very nature.

Here are two styles I've been working on. Whether these paintings are fresh and original, I'll let you decide.

Left: Seated Woman, 24" x 18", oil, acrylic, ink, canvas. 

Right: Woman On Couch, 50" x 36", oil, acrylic, ink, canvas.

Field

While the subject matter is rather simple, this painting took a long time to complete, and the process was somewhat representative of the storms we face in our own minds. Sometimes we encounter chaos in the commonality. 

I used some pearlescent paints in the blues and purples, and the colors therefore shift depending on where you stand, the angle upon which you view it. The effect can't be duplicated in the small unmoving image on a computer screen. The actual painting is six feet wide.

Field (detail)

Field (detail)

Field, 45" x 72", oil, acrylic, ink, canvas, 2016.