Every once in a while this subject comes up. Someone tells me my pop art is shit, I have no talent, and usually they’ll throw in a comment that suggests that they are actually a true artist, as opposed to me. The fake.
Example – This is an exact quote from one such girls journal. (I’m not going to post the link here though because it’s not my intention at all for people to go flame her.)
“So i’ve discovered a girl on LJ that also sells her paintings on Ebay, and her technique is to use a projector to throw the image she wants to paint onto the canvas and then outline it. WTF?? You call that “being an artist”?.. I’m sorry, maybe i’m over reacting here, but sweetie, that’s called tracing. To me that’s completely pathetic and so what if she’s making a bunch of money off of it. I don’t see how she has any real talent if all she does is trace. That just really pisses me off that there are people out there that call themselves “artists” and they do shit like that. How fucking pathetic. All I can do is gag when I read the comments people leave her about how talented she is. HELLO?..Didn’t you read her fucking bio?”
Of course I disagree with her, but I love that she said that. I need to hear it every now and then, not only to keep my ego in check, but also because while I’ll always love praise and kind words, I get tired of only hearing that one opinion because real art doesn’t get just one opinion. Real art is debated by haters and lovers of it. Comments like the one above actually make me feel more….authentic, I guess.
When I first started hearing the harsh critisism I wasn’t thrilled of course. But then I really looked into the subject, read books, learned about others artists, and I’m completey comfortable with what I do. I don’t try to hide it; my technique is stated in my lj profile as well as in my art portfolio.
Andy Warhol, Roy Lichtenstien, Kendall Shaw, Rosalyn Drexler, Thomas Eakins, Chuck Close…all of them, plus thousands of other artists, used a projector in at least some of their work, if not all of it. Either outright or secretly, they all used one. (And dating back to the 400’s artists used a similar technique with a camera obscura). Warhol said, “The reason I paint this way is that I want to be a machine”. Drexler claimed it was a way of using “found objects”, and Shaw stated that he paints “shapes that were found in that event and reform it’s energy.”
While a fan of Warhol, I don’t want to be a machine. I’d say I’m more a combo of the latter two quotes plus something a bit more practical. If I didn’t use a projector for the pop art I would either have to eyeball it or use a grid, and both would take much more time, thus meaning I would have to charge an arm and a leg for anything I tried to sell, otherwise it just wouldn’t be worth all the time it took just to sell it for peanuts. And, while in the last post I stated the fact I do need some money, I’m not in this to makes loads of it. As long as I make enough to get by, I’m happy. And using a projector, I get to have fun, I get to do what I love, I get to make new pieces more frequently, and more people get to be happy because they were able to purchase some artwork they liked.
And that’s my schpiel for tonight. Time to get back to making some more “faux- art” 😉
I have to correct myself. I was mistaken about Rosalyn Drexler using a projector. She actually takes the photo, enlarges it, and paints on top of it.
“And get a load of her techniques — she was a collage artist who selected images from newspapers and magazines, then had them blown up (this is pre-Kinkos, remember), and glued them to the canvas, painting right on top of them (she was the first to try this, and as a technique it’s effective — the works feel painted, yet you can see their paper cut-out underpinnings — it’s a nice juxtaposition)”
-taken from an article on her.