login   password  artist portfolio  gallery portfolio  MYabsolutearts 
absolutearts.com
 
  NEWEST TRENDS |AMP| nbsp; help   |  media kit   |  about us   |  services   |  contact  
  NEWEST TRENDS .         SEARCH   .   BUY   .   JOIN   .   COLLECT   .   RESEARCH   .   READ  .   DISCUSS  

Art Blogs - Artblogs - Art Weblogs - absolutearts.com - wwar.com

 
Home » Archives » October 2007 » Modern Dilema

[Previous entry: "Resale Royalties"] [Next entry: "Hunting fantastic monsters in Oaxaca"]

10/25/2007: "Modern Dilema" by Walter King


Over the last week I've had several suggestions for blogs. One is to speak more about the larger world of art and larger issues in contemporary art. The other was to talk about my own work. I think I tend to avoid the first issue because it can become so contentious. I've avoided the second most often because I don't want to make a habit of using this forum as advertisement for my own work. The more I think about these two ideas the more I realize that they maybe go together. So I'm going to try to discuss some of my painting ideas in connection with some larger contemporary issues.


In the classical world the Greeks found ways of expressing the world through a combination of esthetic mathematics like the Golden Mean and other ideas about beauty and proportion. They understood architecture through the lens of mathematical modal combinations, scale and proportion were sifted for the best proportional arrangements. Much of Greek figurative sculpture and painting had been long since buried or lost by the time of the Proto-Renaissance. A kind of depression or regression covered the art of the Western world during the so called Dark Ages. In part because Christianity found much of the former pagan art offensive. Around the 12th century Art began to focus on the human condition in a world that tried for better or worse to duplicate the objective world we can all agree upon. Ancient Greek sculpture began to be unearthed and many artists were deeply inspired by the naturalism, the balance and lightness of being it possessed. The discovery of those Greek sculptures came precisely at that moment when the Italian world view made man the pivot point and eventually the measure of all things. Mathematical perspective, the study of human cadavers to learn about anatomy, the study of the physics of color and light and the understanding of scale and proportion lead to a supremely rational human centered form of art. The real world had, in their minds, been reborn! The Renaissance! It seems like a pretty straight line from Giotto to Corbet. It's like a stream of water shot from a canon.

Eventually the camera and use of photographs to “capture reality” defined once and for all what art was really about - our common reality!



But sometime after Corbet something very strange began to happen. It is as if that stream petered out and like a fountain turned into a spray which the wind carries in as many directions as there are droplets of water. Ever since Monet turned the art world upside down by making the reflection of the world in between his water lilies things haven't been quite what they were. The long, more or less steady state of art that we had suffered for centuries came to a fairly immediate end. It is very confusing if one tries to follow every tack by every artist after the Impressionists. The zig zagging directions simply bedazzle the mind.

Monet was in fact painting what he saw through his esthetically French eyes. When Kandinsky saw the Monet Haystack paintings he didn't recognize the subject and saw only colors and shapes and textures. It dawned on him that on a two dimensional surface that's all you get - two dimensional reality. And so non-objective abstraction was born as a kind of baseline art reality. Cubism via Picasso and Braque, Matisses use of simplified often flattened figures and harmonic colors and the Expressionists from various parts of Europe, Dresden's de Brucke, the Blue Rider group, several painters from le Beaux Arts in Paris had already set the stage for an art of abstraction, an art about the reality of ones feelings as much as about the visible reality. But none of these were ready to empty their work of all suggestions and reminders of the world we lived in. But Kandinsky was ready to deal solely with the reality of the canvas and its laws.



All hell broke loose. The Futurists began to explore the possibility of motion. The Surrealists the possibilities of time and the unconscious mind, the supremacists and the minimalists the reduction of the two and three dimensional worlds to the least of their variables. Then Dada immerged Like Venus from a toilet. Duchamp did what Monet wasn't really trying to do. Monet didn't think he was doing anything all that different that what had been done for centuries. He was making something beautiful and esthetic. The Dadaists, especially Duchamp, were quite intent on turning everything upside down and shaking it all out onto the floor. They didn't so much question what art was as state firmly from the start that they knew what it was--it was a sham. Esthetics, the mathematics, the anatomy, the careful processes and techniques, the art market itself had been duped into believing the reality that art had pursued for so long was itself a lie. Nothing but a concept, a con job. So they took cheap shots at everything art related. Painting, sculpture, photography and film. Absurdity became a common word in a language that had always sought veracity.

(coming soon) deconstructing lizards.jpg

No one has been able, as far as I know, to locate the actual companies that made Duchamps famous toilet, bottle rack (no bottle now or then actually fits or so I've heard). If the toilet, or Bottle Rack was created by Duchamp, or even some craftsman hired by the artist would it change the value of what he said it meant? Would it roll back the changes in the art world it fostered if it was all a lie? Those ready mades had such an effect on young artists. I suspect Dada is by and large pure contrarianism - a critique with no positive suggestion. I find it very cynical. And Post-Modernism is born of this cynicism. The art of ironies. An art that cannibalizes it's traditions each generation in an attempt to disavow any knowledge or responsibility therein. An art that stands against the very culture of which it partakes. The original post-modernists were mostly French historians with a Marxist slant. They wanted to understand how France managed to bungle the Algerian insurgency so badly. But to do that they found they had to deconstruct the entire French/Algerian history to understand it. Hence the word deconstruct fell into the hands of young art students who, also disillusioned with the current state of affairs found it a convenient concept with which to explore alternate cultural ideas, taunt the status quo and avoid looking traditional - or at least it was a way to do something traditional and still be able to argue that they were contra that tradition.

American painting during the first half of the last century ran amuck in the squalor of Cubism's stylistic flattenings. The Abstract Expressionists for whom paint became the entire reality on the surface finally broke through and contributed a new approach to abstraction. The earthwork artists dealt in the reality of their site specific ideas. Various minimal artists whose rows of rocks, grids of tiles, stacks of bricks or minimal constructions of combinations of material in which the reality of the material becomes the anchor for the image.


I come into this latter period in the middle 60's during the Civil Rights Movement and the Viet Nam War. I began noticing the world of art when I was quite young. My mother had two art books. One was a large coffee table book with all the great ancient and classical artists right up to the French Academy. I was steeped in Da Vinci, Titian, Michelangelo, Raphael, Rubens, Rembrandt. The other book was a smaller book of contemporary art beginning with the Impressionists right through to Hans Hoffman, Pollock and De Kooning. At some point she showed me how to graph up a photograph or print. I was 10. I wanted to be an artist.

(coming soon) fabric.jpg

As I became more and more enamored with the idea that being an artist was what I was here to do I continued to look at contemporary artists. Warhol and the pop artists and the graphic artist's and illustrators of the 60's who spoke to my growing awareness of the culture I lived in. The hyper-realists of the 70's were on top when I went to art school.

In the mid 70's I remember reading that one photo-realist was quoted saying that he wasn't making a realistic picture but an abstraction. The photo he had copied (most likely projected onto the canvas and traced) was simply an excuse to play with the formal abstraction inherent to all art. I do agree that all art is inherently an abstraction. At that time abstraction, primarily Minimalism had a fundamentalist death grip on the arts. To do anything else would get you excommunicated from Art Forum. Everything else was passe. The artist was trying to BS his way past that strangle hold. Of course he was making a picture. But he didn't want it discussed in those terms. It was the first time I recognized a change as it took place in my own time. It wasn't long before picture making became acceptable again. Just like the Pop Artists who stole the Abstract Expressionists thunder the hyper-, super, and photo-realists soon took over the whole show. Art movements used to last 50 years to a century. By the late 60's you were lucky if they lasted 5-10 years. Photo-realism is still with us today in its various forms. Though it seems to have lost some of its impact with rare exceptions.

The neo-Expressionists burst onto the world art scene between my undergrad and grad school school years in the early 80's. Conceptual art had been brewing in the wings since the late 60's. Slowly it gained ascendancy. I’d always found myself drawn to painting even though according to the critics painting was dead by the time I was in grad school. But the conceptual artists of the day weren't really very interesting to me. Even today I'm mostly bored by their work and find their justifications most often a way to cover the lack of communicative skill or sense of presence - again with some exceptions. But the idea of Conceptualism intrigues me even if the art leaves me flat. I worked in school towards a kind of realism at first, mostly because I felt I had to have those skills. Then I morphed logically into an expressionist as I got my painterly feet under me and loosened up. Eventually I fell in love with color and studied Matisse for some time. I remember my painting professor saying once that cubism was the gate into the 20th century. So I toyed with cubism but also felt it was a bit over done and mis-apprehended. Like Matisse I avoided it to a large extent garnering the most important concepts about what could be done on a two dimensional surface with two dimensional shapes while trying at the same time not to be trapped by Cubism's stylistic cages.

I am, at heart, a mystic though not given to superstition. I don't buy into ideas like astrology or
reincarnation.

(coming soon) salvation.jpg

I make pictures. They are a careful blend of form and content. Content has become one of the hallmarks of the Post-Modern movement of the last part of the 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries. While I don't think of myself as a Post-Modernist I probably share, whether I like it or not, some of the same ideas and feelings about the post modern world in which we live. We transform our reality into forms that are in themselves too small to say much. But through metaphor we can hint at meanings well beyond the scope of simply smearing a little colored mud on woven plant fibers. It is a gestalt in that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. In that sense it becomes metaphysical. We can express or suggest far more than we can actually see and achieve. Jung talked of archetypes that transcend our own times projecting backwards and forwards in time and memory. I am always trying to tap into those larger archetypes, the pregnant metaphors that speak a language we all understand even if we can not speak it ourselves. By the way- I'm not a Jungian and am not taken by modern interpretations of Jung even though I like some of his thinking. Archetypes for instance are a kind of stencil or form that hold universal meaning and attraction.




I first experimented with stenciling out of High School in the back of my parents arts and crafts store. It was 1970. I came upon it again nearly 20 years later with the dot matrix paintings. The matrix became something more than the reality of the image. It suggested many possibilities, radiation, a spiritual presence, a certain mathematical order or just a textural device from a formal point of view. Eventually I went from spraying paint through pegboard or painting on pegboard to attaching toys and other elements in a grid like fashion first to the peg board then other supports to create veils and layers through which I painted other images. The matrix itself came from using grids to enlarge images, to frame compositions based on the Golden Mean and other devices one can dream up as a way of organizing the surface of a canvas.

I use a lot of repetition. I've even done multiple variations on an image each on its own support hung in multi panel arrangements like an alter piece with its predella (The step, or raised secondary part, of an altar; a superaltar; hence, in Italian painting, a band or frieze of several pictures running along the front of a superaltar, or forming a border or frame at the foot of an altarpiece. [1913 Webster] .)It is a kind of story board in sequence. Multiple part images can also be used in ways to extend and vary meaning. By placing two works together, each its own often unrelated subject, larger meanings can arise. At some point the toys were used as stencils themselves and eventually disappeared leaving only their shadow doppelgangers.

Finally I began to draw and cut my images from old manila file folders. This gave me the potential of dealing with any subject matter I wanted to attack. My working modus is to never use the stencil image in exactly the same way as I've used it before. I'm always trying to transform the meaning of the images I cut either by using the negative stencil one time and the positive drop the next. Or sometimes I'll let the stenicil fill with paint, turn it around and use it like a stamp or woodcut. And turning an image upside down or sideways it will change the original intent. I'll fold a stencil to turn a horse head or reverse the upper and lower torso on a figure so it becomes a different gesture. Sometimes I retire a stencil by pasting it collage fashion onto the painting surface in some interesting way. And not everything is stenciled. I still work charcoal, pastels, paint and other materials like wall paper, xerography or toys into the work. It opens up the possibilities dramatically.


I like an image that cuts both ways, is loaded with inuendo, or can be two views at one time. In short, I like an image that offers a lot of potential readings. Around 1995 I began using the reclining lovers image, an image I still draw upon from time to time. I made them into sky, ground and shadows, the sea. The day of the 9-11 attacks nearly 6 years later they became the world trade center towers. (see below) Other icons began to find their way into my menagerie of animals and human gesture. The lizard or salamander, deer (inspired by two trips through Pennsylvania to New York and back in one year. Those deer crossing signs - I couldn't get them out of my head. The deer became a poignant sign for the environment, the poet, mans creature-ness. The Missing Tree (below) gets at the idea that there is something going on, the leaves and flowers in color on one panel on the next panel blackened. The shadow of the deer is a man. There is a bit of free association involved but it is directed more than not.




I did a long series of small stencil drawings called Modern Dilemmas a few years ago in which I tried to bond the idea of beauty with absurdity, by imaging as many of the philosophical dilemmas we deal in everyday as I could. I often mine an idea or a concept for as long as possible just to see what I get to. The idea of repetition is inherent to nearly everything I do these days. Whether it is the repeated stencil image that overlays and becomes the atmosphere of a work, the use of wallpapers which are designed to repeat over and over or the use of multiple supports in some variation. One of the dilemmas we find ourselves tied to in this modern society is repetition.





Repetition can be either boring or rhythmically stimulating - it presses the repeated image into our minds, and at the same time we eventually see past it to what lies beyond or behind. The repetition becomes a screen through which we see darkly. It becomes a metaphor for any number of states - focus, depression, discovery, the veil of reality that keeps us from seeing those things we feel but cannot see, the curtain that keeps us from seeing into the next world. I don't claim to know what happens next but I sense it is there.




I can pile up meaning with these overlaid images. Unlike free form montage which depends on free floating connections I can set up a context or syntax with a kind of semantics that defines a little more specifically where to go. Face Dancer (below) touches on this idea. A portrait of a person with little figures tumbling on his face - that moment of flux when you don't quite know how to react and you search your emotions for the right expression.




Most recently I've begun playing with a new way to use the stenciling process. Instead of cutting a whole figure I cut the figure in parts - a torso with head - a leg - an arm - these I can then put together to animate the figure. (see 6 Steps to Defeat Your Neighbor below) The multiple image, storyboard or how too format gives me a bit more time to tell a story. On my site you can see these in use in the Snake Handlers series, The Snake Charmer, and they have a cameo in House on the Hill.





So I have this dichotomy that I deal with - this modern tension - these modern dilemmas. I don't think of myself as a Post-Modernist. I see too many contradictions in the philosophy. However I do comment on what I think is a Post-Modern society- a society in flux, in transit, caught between traditional ideas and modern necessity and the resulting confusion. I see the world in two ways. It is both beautifully mythic and absurdly confused. Yet I am driven to justify it all somehow-- every movement in art, every breaking news story, every image I see, every contradiction, to summarize it at least, to be a witness to both.




Artworks in order of appearance:
1. Slot. Oil on board
2. Nude on a couch. Pencil on BFK paper
3. Agoache/Adroit. Diptych. Acrylic on board
4. Deconstructing Lizards. Auto body primers and charcoal on BFK Paper
5. Fabric. Diptych. Oil on board.
6. Salvation. Oil, encaustic, mannequin parts, toy animals and nails on board.
7. Godzilla. Oil on board
8. Not Concrete and Steel. Auto body primers and charcoal on BFK paper
9. The Missing Tree. Diptych. Oil painted over Xerox copies pasted on board.
10. Face Dancer. Oil on canvas
11. 6 Steps to Defeat Your Neighbor. Auto body primers and pencil on paper
12. I saw Two Men Dancing. 12 drawings, auto body primers and charcoal on BFK papers




Replies: 21 Comments

on Wednesday, October 31st, walt said

Thanks Carol. I like your work too.

on Wednesday, October 31st, Carol Spicuzza said

And your dreams are so beautiful and deep. The deer for example - and the part it has played in man's psyche, which I am sure most people are unaware of, but over the centuries it has symbolized man's ability to renew himself as its role in the Grail legends shows.

Wonderful, wonderful work, Walt.

on Tuesday, October 30th, walt said

I remember reading some time ago that Corot, when asked by a student about how he made such spiritual landscape paintings Corot said to "Dream before nature".

I think, along with working the formal issues, one must dream before ones art. That is my main connection to Jung.

And yes, Carol, while it is like painting in a trance, so to speak, there is a conscious attention paid to what these symbols and archetypes mean, in general and to me specifically. So I suppose it is a form of therapy. An ongoing dialog with the world of forms to put it in the words of Plato.

As with the deer image I find an icon that I feel has some possibilities. I begin to use it in an image. Soon it begins to speak to me in other ways I might not have expected. Soon all sorts of meanings open up and with a little variation, the addition of other images and or repitition the possible content expands and takes on a life of its own that others begin to buy into. Ultimately others must buy into it, be moved by it, internalize it and make it theirs.

on Tuesday, October 30th, Carol Spicuzza said

The way in which his ideas apply to everyday life isn't clear from a casual reading of Jung. The actual therapy is carried out mostly thru dreamwork but you have to read von Franz and some of his other students to get a handle on that. He left it up to them to make his ideas more intelligible to the general public. The other way in which his ideas can be applied to life is thru the observation of synchronistic phenomena which he descibes as the appearance of the archetype in matter. It appears there to give us information about ourselves in a symbolic fashion just as it does in dreams.

Jung has a definition of "spirit" that informs my art and my understanding of it. He says that spirit is that factor in the inner field of vision that generates images and organizes them into a meaningful order. Each new image is a progression and development of the last. Thus the spirit leads you somewhere. To understand my images I look in Jung's works for their historical parallels (which can be uncanny) and the meaning Jung assigns to them. I admit this kind of thing might be too much of a distraction for many but I have incorporated it into the art making process and the result has been that my paintings have turned into a story making process also. The actions of the spirit that Jung describes do seem to be going on in my image making. But this can only happen if you make an effort to discover the meaning underlying the image, otherwise this dynamism of the spirit seems to produce a less focused story. This is probably not a process that would not appeal to most artists as it does take away time from pure image making.

on Tuesday, October 30th, Ellen said

Fascinating to get a glimpse at your evolving art. It is wonderful that you can examine the long line of creativity through the centuries and then observe your own growth! I love the repeating motifs. That concept occurs in music, prose, verse, painting, printmaking, etc. and the recurring themes in nature, of course. Your own art gives the blog so much depth. Great, Walt! I printed it out to reread during my stint on jury duty.....thanks for making the days so worthwhile!!

on Tuesday, October 30th, jose said

I guess I've never really 'looked' at Jung from the perspective of therapy, just as I've never looked at Freud or Lacan from that perspective either, this may sound frivolous but I read them as if I were having a conversation with someone I met in a cafe - you know how you sometimes come across unexpected characters who tell you meaningful things, or not, right out of the blue - pretty much like you say Walt, a poet-philosopher... I always trust that whatever sticks in my mind will be the meaningful stuff for me at the time and hopefully when I meet them again I'll be ready for our next chat. If we take this stuff too seriously it interferes with our work. I agree, the best is to let it hover somewhere in the back of our minds. Like Carol says, that is probably the secret of the effectiveness of such ideas in a work your work of art.

on Monday, October 29th, walt said

Edinger I haven't read. I tend to like the source as I said. Jung leaves so much up in the air, so much potential left unexplored...I don't know how anyone could actually use his ideas as a psychological therapy per se...except as I do...my art is my therapy. I like Jung's ideas as a kind of unfinished lexicon of metaphors. I like the terms...I've stolen the term pregnant metaphor straight from Jung. But I began using it long before I found out it was his.

For me Jung is more, or I should say I read him more as a poet-philosopher than psychiatrist. But I suppose if I was a psychiatrist or psychologist I would have a different take to some degree.

on Monday, October 29th, jose said

Walt, Carol, here's another I personaly found quite insightful: The Essence of Jung's Psychology and Tibetan Buddhism by Radmila Moacanin. Though I agree and share your Marx Brothers views regarding groups!

on Monday, October 29th, Carol Spicuzza said

Where can I see the image they used for their cover?
I'm not surprised that you couldn't understand their ideas. Many modern authors are trying to add to or critique Jung's ideas even though they don't seem to have fully grasped him. This is especially true of the New York group. There is so much to read from the people who actually studied with Jung and really understood his concepts that a person can safely ignore the rest. There are a few major exceptions, one being Edward Edinger, who does an amazing job explaining Jung's later works.

on Monday, October 29th, walt said

Hernandez, I have. Check the archives for Prehistoric Spirits. Yes, they were brilliant. Carol, I did the cover for the NYC Journal of the Carl Jung Society a while back. Reading through it I found them to be beyond my ability to grasp even though I'm fairly familiar with Jung's ideas. I just tend to like the source itself. Also I tend to avoid clubs. You know the Groucho Marks idea that any club that would admit me is not a club I want to join. I like to find my own way. But I appreciate the Jungians more than the Freudians.

on Monday, October 29th, Carol Spicuzza said

Walt...it's fascinating to read about your approach to your work. Your use of archetypal images is most effective and I assume from what you say, partly unconscious, which I think adds to its effectiveness. But tell me, what modern interpretations of Jung are you referring to?

Carol

on Monday, October 29th, hernandez_hermes_2005@yahoo.com">Hermes Hernandez said

You can talk about the brilliant cave Mans art then.They were the Masters in art panting... :)
Hermes Hernandez
Artist Painting
Yonkers New York

Myspace.com and famesource.com,Wellcome Artist.

on Saturday, October 27th, walt said

Jose, Thanks.

"whether we are riding the wave of creativity, racing after it, or simply splashing about at the safe end near the shore."

I think we need to do all the things you mentioned from time to time. Chasing, riding... and then splashing about if only to rest up a bit before chasing the next ride.

I don't know if I'm doing anything important, innovative, anything more than surfing my own creative waves. But I am at least doing that to the best of my ability.

on Saturday, October 27th, jose said

Walt, this new blog of yours forced me to think about things I often trick myself into not thinking about. Thoughts about the choices and paths we take in our art and about whether those choices and paths are keeping us on our toes. Thoughts about investigating and knowing much more about art history and the art of our contemporaries and how it affects our work [or not, and why not]. Thoughts about whether we are riding the wave of creativity, racing after it, or simply splashing about at the safe end near the shore. Thanks for shaking me up a bit.

on Saturday, October 27th, walt said

On the one hand I've been doing this for over 40 years. Dissecting it isn't such a problem. On the other hand, well, you kinda want people to invest some of their own thought into it. Otherwise you feel like you've failed entirely. What do you think? What does it make you feel? Have you ever experienced anything that my work connects too? Add something... please.

on Friday, October 26th, Marjan said

How do you do that? How can you dissect your work? I was asked twice by two publications to do so and found it really hard. You see, most of the time I have no idea how thinks develop (and the obvious embarrassment), but tend to sort of add things in retrospect to give things a linear meaning or purpose, not being sure about the different compartments of my memory bank or not really having the time to condense entire historical theories and references into a couple of sentences.
I admire you for being able to do that.

on Friday, October 26th, antonio hicks said

i would rather see you comment more about your art. the more you can tell us about it, the more it helps us understand who you are and what you are trying to communicate in your art to the people who see it.

on Friday, October 26th, walt said

Rugs,
At best one can only suggest movement. Since the Futurists pretty much inovated most of the techniques still used today it is hard to find something that doesn't look cliche. But there are some perceptual tricks that can be played...those positions where an object is drawn in such a way that it appears to be in two places at once, or seen from two views at once. Tricky. You have to understand both perspective and observation with two eyes. Can't be discussed with out the visuals or it won't make any sense at all. Look at Cezanne's paintings with Pierot the clown. It's the hat on the second figure. The one with the diamond print pattern on his costume. The hat seems to be in two positions at once flipping back and forth on the clowns head. Cezanne probably did it better than anyone in painting. Picasso did it as well. Look at Guernica. There is a head in the bottom left center of the painting. It is drawn in a concave rather than convex form. Once you notice it you immediately see it both ways...as a normal head and as the opposite.

A pattern can move the eye through a compostion.Color relationships can also immitate a kind of movement. Close value relationships often cause scintilation which is the fatigue of the eye because the two colors or a chroma and a neutral are so close yet so contrasting that the eye can't decide which is the focus. This flickering can suggest movement. But it is a very passive effect. Finding artists today who are able to play with these effects is getting harder and harder. Few painting teachers teach these things any more because no one has the patience to learn it. No one is really interested enough to put in the time it takes to understand either the concepts or the discipline it takes to practice their craft long enough to apprehend it.

Sequential art, like comics and animation, and Kinetic art which actually uses small motors and mechanics to move the parts are often employed today.

In my own work I often draw a figure that, as a silhouette, could be two or more different views, legs and or arms reversed in movement. If you look hard you'll notice sometimes that one time you'll see the left leg forward, sometimes the right. I can also modify the image by how I minipulate the value and color through the stencil.

on Friday, October 26th, Nourison Rugs said

Expressing motion through art is one of the hardest things to do. I keep trying to do that but Im never successful. I can never make it seem like there is movement in the picture, in my pieces it looks like Im drawing different pictures in one big piece.

on Thursday, October 25th, walt said

Thanks Andrew, I gave absolutes far too many photos for them to put up. You can see those that didn't show up and lots more on my website:

absolutearts.com/walterking

on Thursday, October 25th, Andrew said

It's good to hear you talk about the path you took to get to where you are today, the influences that changed you along the way, and sort of indirectly about how daily events still affect your work. Many times I've looked at a group of paintings or sculptures , wishing the artist were there to tell me something about it. And you've just done that.