Replies: 6 Comments
on Sunday, November 28th, walterking said
I've avoided responding to this blog not because I had any problems with the idea being put forth but because I simply have a different sence of what suffering is about and why we find it so compelling in art.
Certainly we like the art of say Georgia O'Keefe whose work often does not seem overwrought with suffering, especially the joyous colors and forms of her flowers for instance. Not that she didn't have her own problems and struggles in life. But however she managed to prevail over them. The hints at suffering in her work seems to become spiritualized in her symbology. Van Gogh is another who rarely admits to his suffering in the context of his work. If so it seems unconscious or beneatht he surface of his imagery and therefore takes a knowledge of his life and depth of study to acertain it from the work itself.
Munch made his personal suffering and his imagined suffering the topic of his work as did several of the expressionists.
I can't say suffering is not a valid subject for an artist as all humans carry some scar or other however long or deep and can empathise with other sufferers. They say suffering tempers the soul. It is a tension between the beauty that surrounds us and the imperfection of that beauty...or possibly the imperfection of how we perceive it. All the same as any tension makes for drama it becomes an element of art as it does an aspect of our lives. And so cannot be excluded entirely. Mattisse made images that were to be like an "armchair for the intellectual worker" and his 'joyous' response to life. There is no (well, with few exceptions, very little) violence or suffering apparent in his work. Yet at the very same time he reduced his imagery to very primatively abstracted representations of human form to fit more carefully to the beautiful natural forms and colors with which he worked. At the time these abstractions were considered violent and the movement from which he came was called the 'Fauves' or 'wild beasts'. I wonder if we can ever escape the taint of suffering even when we try to eschew its effect in our art. I would possibly go so far as to say if one hasn't suffered their resulting art may not have the ring of truth. But since I don't know anyone who hasn't suffered at least in some small way I'm not sure I could get away with it.
Should an artist go looking for suffering to make great art? I don't think anyone should choose suffering for the sake of it. But I think we are attracted to those who suffer much( and/or the art that has the scent of that suffering) but who are victorious either in their personal lives or in what they accomplish through and beyond their suffering whether it be Van Gogh, Martin Luther King, Jesus of Nazareth or even someone like Munch. In art though, that suffering is not always so visible. But the art that lacks a tension of some sort tends to leave us a little flat.
on Sunday, November 14th, LorAnge said
I believe artists are born to create, they are driven in spite of difficulties and go their own way, make their own trail no matter how hard it may be.They don't chose the hard life but because of their original visions, they often have to struggle through life. Touching people is what artists do, be it one or a million, unfortunately many die before ever being understood and truly appreciated.
on Friday, November 12th, Ingrid Rosas said
I love Munch since long time ago, my studio is full of his work. My own experience is that even I knew I was born to paint my fears where stronger to get from me a full compromise, so I painted beautifull still lifes in watercolour beautiful, enough to sell. But destiny was waiting and after a microstroke in my brain that for two years of research left half of my body numbed I decided that painting was the only way out of pain, ansiety and fear. I'm cured know maybe painting saved me . When I looked back and I see my series at that time I see them so dark.Now, I'm healed, I'm gratefull, I'm in peace and you can tell from my recent work. I have learned to live only for the moment I enjoy painting the most. Just to see how the inks mixed together with water in a magic and misterious way I'm payed for the day. Depression, ansiety, fear are part of our fragile life but they can be our power to create, to be humans. (sorry about my grammar I speak spanish)
on Thursday, November 11th, Brad Michael Moore said
No one can own another's artist’s or individual's angst... Artists who choose to divulge their innermost horrors are no greater or lesser for their endeavors that those artists who share their sense of the wonders of their worlds. Our bravery is in being honest to the heart of our efforts. It is no more special to hurt in one's expressions of art than it is to love and care and praise. There is a place for all meanings in art. We should not think of suffering as a heroic subject, but instead, as a worthy topic equal of our attention as any other conduit of emotion capable and creditable of being expressed.
on Thursday, November 11th, lynn moore said
I am 58 and was a fine art major, illustrator,book designer and art director. Now I am a painter. My life hasn't gotten any easier over the years. I am working full time and caring for a terminally ill husband and painting all I can. My painting is a refuge. I paint landscapes and rely on the peace painting brings into my life. I am learning so much and am more prolific than ever. I think peace is what I'm after with what I would have my paintings bring to a viewer.
Peace and social justice are things that are very iimportant to me. I like to show mans hand on the eearth and what we can do instead of distirbing the world. I want children to be fed and loved and taught how to help those in confusion and peril. I want government to help me help the helpless, and not cause hate and distruction.
on Thursday, November 11th, mike fornadley said
Most of the expressionist at the beginning of the turn of the century were very influenced by the conditions like the spanish influenza and serving on the front lines of WW1. I believe that there will always be a war as such between art that leans toward expressionism and the ones that curve more to decorative concepts. By far the decorative group would have the advantage as for as being marketable.
Really not to many people have a Munch print hanging in their homes, Matisse or Picasso is another story. That the artist has to go through suffering to produce such work, you may be right, my work would be considered expressionist in nature, but the deeper distrubing nature of the work is missing. Could be living in a different era, region, and a more comfortable environment than our earlier expressionist painters.
Are suffering, distress and anxiety mandatory requirements needed to produce strong and emotionally engaging art? Could a good artist be a member of “the 9 to 5, plus a mortgage and 2.3 kids” set? Inevitably, all art as well as our thoughts are shaped by personal experiences, inner fears and desires. Does the art get progressively better when its creator’s life is filled with hardship and tragic events? 
