Consistency vs Authenticity, Original vs Translation
What happens when an artist does an image again, in a new media?
Perhaps most artists have their favorite media and they simply stick with it. Many artists attempt a subject more than once, and I feel that these creations are each unique originals when done with the artist’s hand. I am sure the artists agree. Either I am still experimenting with many media, I am indecisive, or perhaps it is not in my nature to stick with one media. Since I am the same regarding style, it has been suggested that I am schizophrenic! This was an actual comment made by an esteemed visiting artist from The Art Institute of Chicago, of my assembled work shown during an undergraduate critique! I mean no disrespect to persons with schizophrenia, but I am not. In fact, her comment reflects a lack of understanding of the mental illness itself, but we all understood her point.
Why should artists accept any limitation or expectation placed on their process? I reject that. I believe artists are cowed by marketing gurus and their advice to show consistency. Why should an artist hesitate to use whatever media or style suits the message? This is similar to other imposed expectations suited for marketing but not creating. Examples include the “requirement” for a consistent CV showing uninterrupted art making and showing (as if any life avoids interruptions!), the focus on the “emerging artist” over the seasoned artist (the next bright shiny marketable thing!), or the assumption that large scale work equates to greater ambition, power, or seriousness (this one must come from the patriarchy!). Years ago, when deconstruction was the rage, it seemed a ”requirement” that an artist think about, and place her work in that analytical context. No way! An artist’s sole requirement is to go into the studio and do whatever she is compelled to do. If she does, authenticity will result. Period.
I have been making collages lately. They are extraordinarily time consuming. Cutting my own stencils and printmaking templates, painting my own collage papers, layering over and over and over towards what an image wants to be, sanding panels between layers, adding direct acrylic to tweak and enhance, and by the time it is finished there are so many hours in that I don’t want to sell it! I plan to investigate giclee prints to solve this problem, since the collage process itself is so important to the way I think. Meanwhile, I decided to recreate a collage in watercolor and gouache on a single heavy watercolor paper sheet. I did about 50 of these to get practiced before I tried a larger, more complex collage. I like what resulted!
I think the translation to watercolor makes a new thing, not a print or reproduction. I would sell a giclee of a collage as a limited edition print, but claim the watercolor as an original. That is, unless I made a limited edition print of it! These things get complicated, especially since a great deal of printmaking goes into the early stages of making raw material for the collage.
Collage is the 2-D analog for the additive or constructivist approach to sculpture. It is as valuable as direct painting, during which one constructs an image by additions and eliminations. It is irritating that supposedly “pure” media categories still dominate and force artists to categorize their work by media. I share my media information because it is interesting and useful on a practical level, not because it is of primal importance. Purism in media is an anachronism.
