"Artists and Models of 2008" @ Panza Gallery, Saturday, June 14th.

Slowly, slowly I'm creeping my way toward the completion of my Book of Life project. I've now been at it for two years, and I'm most of the way through the business section. This may not be especially meaningful for those of you who haven't seen this work-in-progress, but rest assured that it means that I have made much progress and I am finally seeing the end in clear sight. I've never sustained this kind of effort for this long on any work of art. I used to keep a journal, and I continued writing in it for years- but that was an indefinite pursuit not meant for the eyes of others. This blog was meant to have specific parameters, yet (as you've no doubt figured out) it has taken on a nebulous quality.

So now that I'm approaching completion, I've begun to think about how I might eventually display the finished piece. There has been some interest from a couple of gallery owners, and I'll have to be very deliberate about making a choice. In the meantime I've found a couple of opportunities to preview very small segments of the whole. As I've previously mentioned, the next Unicorn Mountain (to be titled The Black Forest) will eventually be released. And it will include a number of Book of Life drawings within the selection of great artwork, from a variety of seasoned artists. I'm proud to have been asked to be a part of that. In fact I would have considered it sufficient exposure for the time being. But it turns out that it won't be the first sneak peek.

Tomorrow night (Saturday the 14th) there is an opening reception for a show at the Panza Gallery (115 Sedgewick Street in Millvale) called Artists and Models of 2008. It features the work of a wide variety of artists that draw at the weekly sessions at the gallery. For almost as long as I've been working on the Book of Life I've been showing up every Thursday to sketch live models. There have been old men, young women, and everything in between. Generally I complete 5-7 pages during each session. I've gotten comfortable being around the ever evolving mix of artists that choose to participate in this time-honored activity. During the breaks we have discussions about art, politics, sex, religion and other miscellaneous topics. It's a community I feel fortunate to be able to participate in.

Most of us have submitted drawings and/or paintings for this show. There is a wide range of styles and media represented, but the content remains the same- the human figure. One might expect a collection of such images to be mundane. After all, literally thousands of people have honed their skills via the "live nude". Everyone is familiar with the human body from a lifetime of observation. What could possibly be exciting or new about such an exhibition? Haven't we seen all of this before? The answer might surprise you. Certainly everything on the walls of the gallery will be recognizable as a human being, but each piece in turn will reveal a specific set of presumptions and proclivities that make up an individual perspective.

As I was walking around before this past week's session, I was pleasantly surprised and delighted by the array of interpretation on display. It was good to be reminded that art is not always about pure form, but rather often deals with the idiosyncratic approaches possible within the artistic imagination. Such well-trodden subject matter is still capable of enlightening the viewer. I began to see these works as representations of the creators rather than simple portrayals of the external stimuli being conveyed. I hope that those who choose to see this show will have a similar experience. These are all windows offering glimpses of greater vistas. Don't just come for the naked bodies.

The Artistic Paradox.

I made it back to Panza Gallery for another drawing session. I've only been going once every few weeks since the baby was born. The rotation of models has been consistent, so I haven't been missing out on new people to draw. I'd love to finish The Book of Life with some variety. I'm in the business section now, partially through the letter "e". The end of the project is in sight... it has been for awhile now. I am ready to be done with it- an entire phone book filled (every other page) with drawings. Somehow I'm starting to feel confined, as if I was curtailing my artistic progress. On one hand, I know that my skills have improved markedly in the nearly two years that I've been working on this thing. But I can't help feeling that my imagination has been stagnating.

I've been daydreaming about doing some more experimental drawing. I'd like to continue drawing from live models, but find a way to advance a sort of mutated vision. For some reason I've felt constrained to doing rather conventional figure drawings in this book. It certainly seems to fit my intentions for the project. Still I keep thinking about strange growths and exaggerations. I hope finishing this will be as liberating as I think it might be. I could have simply taken a break from it and started something else, but the lag in my progress has been glaring. Last year at this time I was drawing several times a week. As it is, it's looking like I'm not going to be done for several more months.

I know that the structure and the discipline required for completing The Book of Life will have a substantial payoff. The scope of the endeavor entails an inevitable development. I once read about a chess grandmaster who suggested that merely playing a 1000 matches would lead virtually anyone to become something of a master of the game. For that expert, getting better is largely a matter of perseverance. One can't help but learn something from repetition. This is most likely applicable to drawing as well. It would be hard to argue that I'm not improving my level of craft. But I have to ask myself whether it is making me a better "artist".

When I see the mannered paintings and drawings of those who aspire to the mastery of the classics, I don't necessarily consider these pieces to be "art". I can be impressed by the level of craftsmanship displayed, but they don't move me in the ways I expect "art" to move me. There must be conception, not just representation. I don't see the point in simply trying to make an image incredibly realistic. I have photography if I want to represent reality. Even in that medium, I've been moving further away from conventional documentation. So what is it I'm looking for? I appreciate the idiosyncratic and intensely personal work that forms a unique world view. That's the type of art I want to make.

The complication in all of this is that a certain level of technique is necessary to be able to convey my ideas into their external form. I've never had formal instruction in any of the pursuits of self-expression that I'm involved in. That goes for drawing, writing and photography. Still I can't help thinking that study and practice could only expand my possibilities. And yet this has to be balanced with a looseness of articulation that involves being apart from convention. If I learn the "proper" way to do these things, then they are going to be (by definition) less subjective and more derivative. It's a conundrum that I'm having difficulty synthesizing.

The Formation of a Political Worldview.

It's surprising just how much the heavy, sticky heat oppresses whatever vitality I might usually have. I usually don't get too hung up on weather conditions, but for some reason this summer has seemed especially brutal so far. Ach, maybe it's because I didn't go to the beach this year? Anyway I came very close to sleeping through my weekly drawing session. For a few months now it's been necessary to show up a half-hour early just to get a decent spot to draw from. But even though I had a very late start, I decided to go over just to see if I'd be motivated to make the best of the situation. I ended up simply sitting on the concrete steps outside, talking to a few of the regulars.

One of my drawing buddies has two adult children, and she was telling us about her son. Without getting into specifics, what particularly interested me about her story is the fact that her boy is the first member of her family to become a Republican. I've always been fascinated by cases where an individual deviated significantly on the political spectrum from his/her immediate family. Perhaps this is the case because I am alone in my family in being political progressive. My folks and my brother are (or were until rather recently) quite conservative. My dad was even a young Republican during the late 60's. I did have a set of (maternal) grandparents who were old school union Democrats. But truthfully I can't remember a whole lot of political discussion around my house when I was growing up. It just wasn't that kind of family. There was a lot of talk about sports and television. No one was particularly heavy-handed about their beliefs- at least not enough that I can remember anybody having an overt influence on my thinking. I don't remember caring much one way or another.

If I did receive a political education at all, it was through the public schools. I realize that most people that hear that statement immediately draw assumptions about what it means. Today in Pittsburgh that likely suggests "liberal propaganda". I don't know whether that is, or is not, the case. But in my birthplace, it meant something altogether different. There was a lot of reactionary thinking in the town where I grew up. The demographic was shifting rapidly, and traditional authority figures were generally pretty upset by it. So there seemed to be very few "progressive" teachers in the school system. I remember my 7th grade teacher complaining about the pressure he experienced as a young man to register as a Democrat. Of course when he was in his youth, that meant something entirely different than it does today.

Notably I had a history teacher in eleventh grade that many in the community viewed as a Communist. The reality was that he wasn't buying the party line on the Soviet Union. In the 80's it was extremely popular to villify the Russians, and see them as the incarnation of absolute evil. Mr. F. questioned that line of thinking, and tried to give us another perspective. He taught us to examine our prejudices to see how they formed our opinions. I know for a fact that he got into trouble with parents and administration over that. I remember being pretty skeptical about what he was telling us, but I'm sure there were seeds planted during that time that would bloom later in my life. Still I would have been mortified if anybody would have taken me for anything other than a Republican. When I was a kid I never questioned that affiliation.

But when I came to Pittsburgh for college, everything changed quickly. The 'Burgh is a solidly blue town, with a lot of working class attitude. I deliberately chose a university in a place where I would know nobody, because I believed I needed to reform my whole identity. I chose people to hang out with that were radically different from any I had ever known. I got involved in activities I would never have anticipated. And I changed quite rapidly. A lot of my political views were challenged during the first Gulf War. That conflict opened up parts of me I had never examined very closely. The discussions I had with my peers led to an evolution of my worldview. Perhaps it's true that I was merely reacting against things I disliked about my previous home, but many of the new habits and beliefs I adopted have stuck with me to this day. I almost can't imagine the person I was at age eighteen. I know my family had some difficulty adjusting to the "new" me, but eventually we worked through a lot of the resulting issues. Now there's another sea change in society, and I can relate to a lot of the confusion and cynicism spreading throughout the nation. I've been through it already.