Showing posts with label Review and criticism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Review and criticism. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 11, 2013

Powdering my Wig


I am heading to Madison Indiana to judge their 15th Annual Regional Fall Show. I will be following that up by teaching a two day Still Life workshop for the Madison Art Club.

I have posted a few times about judging shows, it is something I really enjoy and I believe it tends to sharpen my views on what makes for a good picture.
If you live in the area there is still time to sign up for the workshop. It promises to be a fun and informative couple of days.

Painting Workshop
Madison, Indiana,  September 13 - 14
Learn the greater art of “seeing” as practiced by the Boston School Tradition and how it is applied to Painting Still Life. 
Participants will gather items they wish to paint and begin arranging them.
The focus of this class is to provide an initial introduction to the steps taken and the principles applied in the art of still life painting.

This includes:

    -the conception of a "visual" idea for a painting. 
    -the arrangement  and organization of values, hues, and chromas on the canvas    -the execution of a coherent and helpful charcoal drawing with which to compose the stuff within the picture plane. |
    -the execution of  a lay-in or 'start' in oil.
    -what to consider while pushing towards a finish.

Fee: $175 per person, supplies not included. Class limited to 15 students.

I will post next week as a follow-up on both the show and the class. 

Friday, September 14, 2012

Unisex Art Club and Art Club for Women.

I have a small piece in a show that opens tonight at the Cincinnati Art Club.  


Unbolted, 3 1/2" x 5", oil on linen, ©copyright Richard Luschek 2012
Signature Member Show Opening Reception
Friday, September 14, 6-9 p.m.
Exhibit open Sat., Sun., Sept. 15, 16, 22, 23

1021 Parkside Place, Cincinnati, Oh 45202


Yesterday I was honored to be asked to judge an art show for the Cincinnati Women's Art Club. The show is the Annual Members Exhibit, and will open this Sunday, September 15 through October 7th.

I had to chose 1st, 2nd and 3rd. Out of an entire room packed with paintings that is a challenge. I thought I would talk a bit about my method for choosing the works I did. I do enjoy judging art shows, as it is a solid lesson in what makes a painting successful. 
My first method is to do a cursory stroll through the gallery to quickly look at everything. I then stand in the middle of the room and slowly spin around to see what attracts my eye. I grabbed some cards they had stacked by the door as advertising for the show- I grabbed a handful and dropped cards in front of pieces I thought should be considered for the top prizes. I quickly narrowed it down to about 10. The only issue with this is that twice, club members strolled through while I was judging and tidied up the space, picking up my cards.
Then I made sure to slowly walk around and look at every piece. I found it interesting how many pieces I had not seen at all in the first two go arounds. Now that I was forcing myself to look at each one I was finally looking at some of them. Interestingly, this did not change my initial decisions at all. The paintings "invisible" to my initial look, were not helped by careful study.
 

So, the lesson learned- a painting has to have a powerful abstraction of lights and darks. When I say light and dark, I do not mean white and black, but some arrangement of values that catches the eye. Paintings can be monochromatic, but they should never be monovalumatic- is that a word? Well, it is now, it means having a single value. Paintings are going to be more successful with clearly stated value patterns with a pleasing arrangement.
I also considered good used of color and edges to control the space and atmosphere in a picture. There were a few paintings that had deep space, with good drawing, but the artists had not adjusted the color or edges at all to control space.

I want to stress how little subject matter influenced what I chose. A painting of road kill could have won if it was done well enough and had some beauty. A judge does of course have specific tastes. I tend towards realism, so any paintings that were merely abstract were probably not going to get much consideration. Sorry, life is not fair.  

I think most people see me as a still life painter. While a few still lifes were in my top 10, I did not pick a single still life for an award. Again, I may have been harder on still life, but again, I tried to make it a visual game.
I will be at the Fund Raising Event on September 21st, so anyone with paintings in the show that has questions about my thoughts on their work can of course talk to me. Be prepared, I may be a bit tipsy and opinionated, but my wife will be there to make sure I am well behaved.


Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Premature Exclamation

I have to apologize for posting about a painting as if it were done, before it was.
I was checking out the painting on the computer and noticed a few issues I will talk about now.
When I finish work quickly, I try to leave the still life up for a few days just in case I find any major problems. I like to have a few days away from the work, so I can look at it fresh. If I am satisfied with the work, I disassemble the set up and frame the painting.
Painting with no no's.



















I knew I had an issue at the handle of the coffee cup. A bunch of lines all coming together at a point. I had tried to fix this by controlling the values- making them very similar so it was not an issue.
It was still an issue, I decided to raise that line of the table up so it was higher on the cup.

Next I had a series of spaces that were all the same size. The handle of the coffee pot, the spoon and the space between them were all the same size, evenly spaced and the same angle. Another no no. I could not stop looking at it.

So, I stood in front of the painting, used my maul stick to flagellate myself on the back to teach myself a lesson and then got to work.
While I was at it, I fixed a few other thing, tweaking the color in the coffee pot, darkening the left side of it, and sharpening some edges on the wax paper. 
Here is the final picture, framed and in the Gallery.
Off To The Races, 12"X 9", oil on linen, ©copyright Richard Luschek 2012
Now I am satisfied with it.

Sunday, February 5, 2012

Hauser Book Release

I have mentioned before a book about Cincinnati painter John Hauser for which I penned a chapter. The book has finally been released and authors were signing copies at the show featuring the artist's work on view now at the Cincinnati Art Galleries.
It was a lovely opening and not just because the author's wife, Marilyn Harris  did the food. Though you know the snacks are one of the major things I factor into my judgement of the success or failure of an art opening- and the food was amazing.


The book can be purchased at the gallery or online at this website:
The John Hauser Project.
If you are interested in the article I wrote for the book you can read it in this post.

Monday, January 9, 2012

The Destruction of a Building.

This is part 2 of a series of posts about the travesty that is the "updating" of the Art Academy building.
A drawing of the building from 1885 showing the building before it was attached to the museum complex.
Again, I am just going to continue the discussion with a second letter I sent out on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 after they offered up a presentation of the building as if it were a rickety old barn about to fall over. It was a presentation with an agenda.
Concerned Citizens of Cincinnati:

The Cincinnati Art Museum is proposing a Facility Master Plan for some ambitious growth. The museum is presenting ideas and options at six stations located throughout the museum complex. Essentially there are two plans, of which the most clearly touted option involves destroying the wonderful and historically important Art Academy. Built in 1887, it was designed by the great Architect, James W. McLaughlin.

Please go to the museum, have a look at the plans and voice your opinion.

I attended the member’s forum held on Monday and would like to share my thoughts. I definitely have some concerns about the Museum’s presentation.

The Master Plan presented to the members on Monday was biased and manipulative. Instead of presenting a range of options, the Museum offered only two — in effect, a “right” one and a “wrong” one!  This Master Plan could well have said right at the beginning, "If you are foolish enough to think the Art Academy building should be saved, we are here to help you understand how ridiculous that would be."

As I viewed the stations, I saw and heard a lot of "Ours isn't as big as theirs" comparisons to other museums, calculated to demonstrate our inequities. Since when does size matter?  We have a top notch museum!  These discussions of needed growth at all costs sound like those of a company catering to its stock holders who demand, "We must grow or die!" Did I miss something?  The museum is still a non-profit organization isn't it?  It's not the size of your museum that matters; it’s how you use it. Why should the CAM be concerned about how flashy, new and competitive it is? That is a job best left to the Contemporary Art Center. The trend in numerous museums is a move away from deep, quiet and studied scholastic thought, towards flashy pop culture. Is this really the direction the CAM should go?  This flashy plan could result in the bulldozing of building that, while it may not be glistening with new glass and steel, has a stately presence that is timeless.

The Art Academy build is a fine example of American Romanesque Architecture.  Its beautiful exterior is the jewel of the entire museum complex.  One plan keeps the building, yet butts an addition along the façade.  The second, and most developed plan, destroys the Academy building and replaces it with a giant rectangle. We would be replacing an architecturally significant building with a box. 

The Cincinnati Art Museum Facility Master Plan is using some bombastic rhetoric to push for a larger and snazzier plan that expands over the soon-to-be razed Academy building. One reason the museum offers for razing the building is that, "The Academy has been considerably compromised and left in bad condition." Has it really? Three beautiful floors remain. While it has been altered, it is a strong presence that is still quite beautiful and well worth saving. Cathedrals in Europe have been considerably altered and governments still work to preserve and save them.

When we were directed toward station 3 in the Academy building where we expected to hear the pros and cons of saving the building, the tour conveniently led one through the unimpressive back hallways of the Academy building itself. There, in the Academy building, which, in all fairness, is in need of restoration, I listened for the "pros" but did not hear any.

Information was given in a very negative way, discussing only the problems and concerns of the Old Academy building. Missing was an option that restores the Old Academy building to its original glory?  There was no discussion of its great history, or of the days when it was one of the nation’s top training centers for young painters.  A number of paintings produced by graduates of the early Academy hang in the museum’s collection. While the interior may seem unimpressive after walking through the decorated walls of the museum galleries, remember, it was built to be a working studio building for training painters, and for that function it is one of the finest surviving examples. 

Another complaint frequently brought up as an unsolvable problem, is that the Academy building is built a half floor off from the main building. I’ve always been under the impression that getting from one level to another is a fairly simple architectural idea.  It is probably one of the earliest innovations in architecture, right after the idea of constructing a roof! But here we sit and scratch our heads over 6 or 7 feet.

Questionable statistics were often used to push the CAM’s agenda, perhaps the most egregious being their complaint that they are only able to show 3% of the Museum's collection.  This sounds compelling enough, unless you’re aware that all but the smallest museums display only a fraction of their collection. It is interesting to note that this was one of the few statistics utilized by the Museum that was not compared to those of other museums. In fact, the largest portion of the CAM collection is made up of drawings and prints that are light sensitive. They are safely stored in controlled environments for preservation, and are only placed in the galleries for a limited time. At present the museum shows the best of its collection. This is as it should be.

The final station, explaining the need for educational space was laughable. Here again the numerical comparison of the CAM to various other museums was disingenuous. They claimed to have only 1700 square feet of educational space. Apparently the only space now available to the museum for education is a small room which was last used as the museum café.  When I asked about the huge differences between the square footage, I was told that the other museums may be including their lecture halls.  OK, why are we not including our lecture hall?  What exactly is the Cincinnati museum using their lecture hall for? I called the Toledo Museum of Art, and their huge number (40,000 sq feet) includes a Fine Arts center in which the University of Toledo offers art classes. So this is not really a fair comparison. I have always considered the galleries hung with art as educational space.  I asked the Toledo museum what they label as educational space.  Interestingly, they feel that almost all of their spaces serve an art-educational purpose.

It seems to me, and to several other attendees who later voiced their opinions, that there was no serious attempt to make a professional, viable plan to preserve the Academy building. On the other hand, the plan without the Academy building was expertly landscaped and polished with all the bells and whistles. Their presentation was carefully crafted to discredit the option saving the Academy building. It is the classic Straw Man argument, useful in a debate, but falling far short of the kind of considered discussion that this situation calls for.
Cincinnati deserves to see a third version of the plan, one that includes the Historic Art Academy building, with the bells and whistles too.  If one wants to consider destroying a building with such historic presence, it ought not to be done lightly.  I believe we must save the Academy building!  Once it is gone, it is gone forever.

Please know that I support and understand the museum's quest for more gallery space. I also recognize that he last few updates to the museum have been quite positive. The Cincinnati Wing is a shinning example of what this museum is capable of and how proud we should be of its past.  How many other cities of this size can field such an impressive collection of work by local artists? The Art Academy building is the seed from which that talent germinated! Despite this fact, I find their current plans to be utterly inadequate. So inadequate in fact, that one could make the case that this is not just about trying to save a building, but is a major social and political issue concerning the goals of our public institutions.

The point could be made that I should just appreciate the two choices, and that the museum could just as easily not have offered us any chance to review their plans.  Such an argument would ignore the fact that the Cincinnati Art museum is not a private institution but a public one.  The museum's administration is not made up of elected officials that have the power to make major decisions for us. They should not make major decisions, and then veil them in a seemingly democratic process while offering up only two woefully unequal choices.

Webster defines museum as "a building, place, or institution devoted to the acquisition, conservation, study, exhibition, and educational interpretation of objects having scientific, historical, or artistic value." If the current administration is not able to see how the Old Academy building fits into that definition, maybe we need to look at what the ‘mission statement’ of the museum is and reconsider how we spend our tax dollars and to whom we should give our generous donations. 


Richard J. Luschek II, Painter

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Rest in Pieces

The former location of the Cincinnati Art Academy- now being adapted for use by the Cincinnati Art Museum.
I believe one goal of a museum should be to teach and display the historic masterpieces of society; to demonstrate good taste and the higher ideas of truth and beauty. These days, instead of a masterful display of higher ideals, it is most often about entertainment and pushing an agenda or political view. A lot of new work chosen for display is about chaos; ideas that supposedly embody progress but are often just offensive in a gross attempt to shock- one could write an entire book on the topic of chaos in art. Any work of true beauty that is displayed (generally being at least 100 years old) is often described by the curator with modern eyes, ignoring the bigger ideals and historic context, instead focusing on perceived sexist or racist overtones. Aesthetics are rarely brought up. The lack of aesthetics can be seen in the atrocious presentations in many of the shows. The recent renovation of the Schmidlapp Gallery are a perfect example. I have discussed the ineptitude of displaying artwork in the past. 
The push of these ideas of chaos are happening not only inside the museum but are continuing outside and are destroying the most beautiful building of the entire Eden Park complex.

I will continue discussing this disaster in future posts, but would like to begin the conversation with a few letters I wrote back  in 2005 that garnered a lot of attention, resulting in uncomfortable phone conversations with museum directors and newspaper reporters. It was a response I was not expecting and one I must admit I was not entirely prepared for. When Timothy Rub (the director at the time) called me, put out and insulted by my letter, he denied that they had in fact decided to tear down this building. Well of course this was just smoke and mirrors. An attempt to get those criticizing their actions to back off.

Shortly after they announced their plans to tear it down despite a grassroots movement to stop it. 
Timothy Rub  moved on to greener pastures in Cleveland. A new director was chosen to manage the Art Museum expansion.  At first I was hopeful, as he claimed to be a scholar of architecture. He even discussed his love for the Art Academy building and it's architect, James W. McLaughlin (1834-1923)

Well, not sure what to say about the following photo, "Uh, thanks for not burning this to the ground."


A construction crew is tearing off the 3rd floor, with it's copper roofing and wonderful North facing sky lights. It is to be replace with a modern glass box that from the designs I have seen, will look like a big square fish tank.
The following is the letter I sent in a mass emailing 7 years ago:


"Throughout the discussion on options for the future of the Art Academy building, there are many reasons tossed about which in the end would seemingly justify tearing the building down.

One argument is that the museum complex is no longer unified architecturally.
The museum, as it should, displays paintings and sculptures of many moods, styles and periods.  The museum complex itself also happens to be made up of many styles.  Isn't the Art Museum complex itself a
superb educational tool?

Another suggested 'problem' is that the Academy building has been altered from it's original grandeur. Does this then make it obsolete and fodder for  the wrecking ball? It is not necessary to assume that a building be fully restored to its original state to be saved.  Great cathedrals all over Europe have been seriously altered and rebuilt over time.  They have changed with the tastes and moods of the day, from Romanesque to Baroque for example.  This doesn't make the current state less valid.  This doesn't mean it is not worth maintaining if it is not as the original architect envisioned. It may not have all of the glory of the original, but it is still an impressive and beautiful piece of architecture.

Most of the damage to this lovely building has been done since the late 40's, being topped off with the cold and unfortunate addition of the Adams-Emery Wing added in the 60's.  This was followed with the strange addition of the museum power plant located right at the museum entrance.

The last major move move spun the progress of this museum's renovation around in the right direction with a "$13 million renovation project, completed in January 1993, restored the grandeur of the Museum's interior architecture and uncovered long-hidden architectural details."  I must now say emphatically that the possible destruction of the Art Academy building would be a serious move away from this progress.

I understand that the Museum has limited funds and is in need of more space for its collection. Undoubtedly, saving this building will take dedication and a good deal of creative thinking.

In addition, I realize that there may be more glory in building a supposedly 'forward thinking, ground breaking, modern glass and steel structure' than there is to saving this symbol of Cincinnati's past, but I believe that it is imperative that we do save her! 

I've been asked why I am so committed and involved in the future of this wonderful building.  After all, I did not graduate from this school, and while I have worked in the building as an instructor, I am not a member of the faculty.  I am, however, a painter and citizen that is proud of this city's past influence in the arts and the place that the old Academy building holds in its history.  As a citizen of this city I have an opinion on how our museum uses its funds and educates the public. I hope you, the community have opinions of your own and will make them known to all that will listen.
Spread the word.

Thank you
Richard Luschek "

Saturday, October 29, 2011

John Hauser- Cincinnati Painter of Indians.

 I was recently asked to write an essay for a new book on the life and works of John Hauser, an Indian painter from Golden Age of Cincinnati art.  The painter's house and studio are just a few blocks from where I live. The current owners of the Hauser house and studio are a lovely couple that have become champions of the painter, and have organized shows, given talks and finally, Mr. Harris has written a much needed book on the artist.
He recently sent me an email that the book is going to print soon. I thought as a preview I would share my essay here. You can see more information about the project and book here.
http://www.johnhauserproject.com/

John Hauser in his studio.

We are very pleased to tell you that our book is now complete and in the hands of the publisher. It is scheduled to appear under the title:

*Straight White Shield* A Life and Work of John Hauser (1859-1913) with a Catalogue Raisonné
a preface by Phyllis Weston and an essay by Richard Luschek
xiv + 308 pages

In addition to being the first biography of this forgotten artist, it also offers a survey of his reception within the art world and a source book of the complete newspaper citations, a page of sample signatures to help authenticate and date his work, a section on the studio where he worked with a full set of photographs, an annotated bibliography and such extras as family trees.It is also, of course, richly illustrated with countless previously unpublished works.

/Straight White Shield/  will appear in early February, 2012, in conjunction with a major exhibition of the works of John Hauser at Cincinnati Art Galleries, 225 East 6th Street, in downtown Cincinnati. You’ll have ample opportunity to see and purchase the book.
For further information, please contact epharris@cinci.rr.com

A Critical Look at John Hauser

By Richard Luschek

Having lived in Cincinnati as a painter for twenty years, I have great admiration for the wonderful collection of painters from Cincinnati’s Golden Age. When we study the outstanding artistic heritage of this city, an impressive group of painters can be assembled, most notably Duveneck, DeCamp, Sharp, and Farny. One name, however, which is often absent from this discussion is that of John Hauser. This book sheds light on this forgotten Cincinnati painter.
I have been given the humbling task of critically analyzing the work of John Hauser, specifically his dependence on photographs rather than live models. I have chosen to begin with an observation taken from the brief biography of Hauser issued by the Altermann Gallery in Santa Fe: “. . . Hauser tended to model his subjects rather heavily, which could very well have resulted from the artist's over reliance on the photograph as a resource tool.” This quotation sets the tone for my discussion of Hauser’s work. This book offers a fascinating look at one of Cincinnati’s most neglected painters. Hauser captured the nobility of the American Indian, painting quiet scenes of them in their own environment. To quote the authors of this book, “Hauser’s output is uneven and many of his pieces left his studio that probably should not have. . . . His work is often derivative in the choice of subject matter and composition and he falls into the cliché trap often. That being said, however, he is clearly capable of creating an occasional masterpiece.” (p. 123)
This book offers a wealth of illustrations of Hauser’s work and you may judge them for yourselves. A complete view of the artist from my perspective can best be presented by discussing a few deficiencies found in Hauser’s work. In particular, I will offer some insight into his “uneven” output. Let me start by saying I believe any of Hauser's deficiencies are less a question of talent than that of his limited training and subsequent overuse of photography.
It is a myth that great artists are born geniuses. Most successful artists have studied long and hard to develop their craft, most often having studied under a master who was trained similarly. The techniques of a painter have been passed down through the ages from teacher to student since the Renaissance. The students learned these techniques through intense study of classical sculptures from ancient Greece and Rome, copies of great works of art, and intense study of nature. This worship of nature joined with a love of beauty helped guide understanding of a visual truth—a truth that could be represented in paint.
The advent of photography forever changed the art world. Artists had not only new competition in visual representation, but also a versatile tool at their disposal for closer study of the visual world, if they could avoid its pitfalls.
Many great artists welcomed photography as a means to aid their perception. They could explore new compositions and poses difficult to capture from mere observation. The additional motifs allowed by the camera aid the artist’s memory of a natural scene. Poses that a model or animal would be unable or unwilling to hold can now be captured with the camera.
Naturalists of the nineteenth century such as Jules Bastein-Lepage (1848–1884) and Pascal Dagnan-Bouveret (1852–1929) used photography to great effect along with their rigorous academic training. Their understanding and mastery of the rapidly developing craft allowed them to use photography as a tool rather than something to slavishly follow as the sole means of creation as is often done today.
Problems with Photography
Rarely does a photograph have the mood and atmosphere admired in history’s great paintings. What accounts for this difference? Painting's most manifest definition is the interpretation of form. The painter, when representing the visual world, directs the viewer into believing a two-dimensional surface is depicting three dimensions. Since a painter typically has been blessed with two eyes, when he is working from nature he is simultaneously able to see two views of the same scene. This dual view from slightly different perspectives allows for understanding form and spatial relationships.
I am sure you have heard it suggested that the camera adds ten pounds. Unlike human vision, a camera is monocular, offering only a single view. This flattens out the image, making it formless. Conversely, when we look at things with both eyes we see the shift in perspective known as parallax—background features hidden from one eye can be seen by the other. Our brain is able to blend these images into one. We see more of what is behind the object when using two eyes, making the object appear smaller. Thus, a binocular view is slimming. In seeing around an object we have more of an idea of an object’s form; a monocular view does the opposite.
In addition, and again unlike a camera, our eyes have a limited focal area. Outside that area of focus, objects can be perceived but not studied in detail. This area is our peripheral vision. A camera has the tendency to put everything into equal focus. Even further, a camera is just not as sensitive or accurate in perceiving half tones, shadows, and minute changes in color.
As if that were not enough, there is yet another problem involved in the overuse of photographs for painting reference. Photography is static. An artist can rely too strongly on the photograph as the final word. Happenstance events while painting from life can not only increase the painter’s understanding of the visual world but can improve the final work. A portrait model can move slightly; a fold of clothing shifts or a curl of hair may fall into the face, offering artistic possibilities the painter had not initially considered. When painting outdoors, a shadow under a tree will move with the sun, presenting the painter with variety. A camera does not study a scene through time or capture the dither and vibration of life.
Photographs are flattened, fully focused images which can cause the artist
to “model his subjects rather heavily,” missing the atmosphere and beauty found while standing before nature.
John Hauser and his Camera
There is little doubt as to the talent of the artist we are discussing here, but I believe that his limited training and overreliance on the photograph accounts for his spotty output. While he did travel to some of the best schools at the time, his studies appear to have been cut short for financial reasons. Upon returning to Cincinnati, he went to work with the tools he had at his disposal and, certainly by 1893 and his fascination with the West and the American Indian as his subject matter, he began relying on photography as a means to execute his paintings. Working in Cincinnati as a painter in this milieu, he was forced to use the reference photos he had taken during his trips west. This reliance on photography was a limiting factor on his growth as a painter. In working this way he missed the vibration of life, his work often appearing static and overrendered. He was left to repeat compositions from his collection of photos and drawings. Photos are copied, quirks and all. Some of his compositions are not explored as carefully and as thoroughly as one might when working directly from life or from memory. Assembling a scene from a variety of photographic and sketched sources can give a painting a harsh and cut-out, illustrative appearance.
Hauser’s “Laguna Pueblo” paintings (p. 159) offer a fine example of this effect. He began as early as 1895 to produce variations on a theme that could be modified only slightly and still claim to be an original. (He was not the only painter of the period to adopt this “business plan.”) In one case, Hauser found an appealing Pueblo background, a downward-sweeping main street leading into the old Laguna Pueblo which widens into the main plaza of the village, with the picturesque multi-level adobe structures stacked to the horizon. In the foreground he shows a variety of Pueblo Indians carrying out everyday chores: a woman with an olla on her head, a man bearing a bundle of sticks, children on burros, or sitting on an abandoned cart, all of which were taken from photos from the 1893 Pueblo album. (p. 158) It seems a safe assumption that he painted a number of identical background scenes, generally in an oblong 18 x 12” format, emphasizing the verticality of the scene, then filled in the foreground with a seemingly random combination of assorted figures modeled on the photographs as shown on the following page. Works in what we can call the Laguna series begin as early as 1895 and continue as late as 1905. Some of the photographs and four examples of the series are given on the following pages.
On page 160 is another example which may or may not have anything to do with photographs, but does illustrate a key problem with Hauser’s approach. The first two paintings have a group of Indians on horseback evenly arranged like paper dolls on a painted background. If we examine the image as an arrangement of light and dark shapes, each of the parts, while meticulously painted, is done without enough consideration of the image as a whole. Close tangents should be avoided in a composition. In the first painting the hand of the chief is just touching the tree at a right angle. At the center of this painting, the horses feel uncomfortably close with their noses just about to touch.

“Indians on the Trail,” 1902
If we examine a variation on this subject within the same year in the painting at the bottom of the page we see a much more successful grouping and arrangement of these mounted Indians. We now see a painting with variety, rhythm and atmosphere.
“War Party,” 1902

Lastly, we have to consider the young age at which Hauser’s career ended. Most well-trained artists will continue to improve and hone their craft as they age. One can easily see continued growth in the works of Joseph Henry Sharp after the age of fifty. As we examine Hauser’s work chronologically we can see gradual improvements in his working methods up until his final years. We can only imagine how his work would have developed had he lived a long and full life and not been plagued with poor health.
In this essay I wanted to explore some of the problems in his work, put them in context, and give explanations for them. John Hauser produced a number of fine paintings. A Western artist, living in the Midwest John Hauser faithfully illustrated the dying culture of the American Indian. He did so with reverence, attention to detail, and studied execution, portraying his subjects with dignity.

Friday, October 14, 2011

iUpdate

An artist friend of mine sent me an email after reading my last blog about a ridiculous museum show (click here), totally based on name recognition rather than actual artistic ability.
Really the point of that blog post was two fold- first to comment on digital art, and how portable devices are progressing this new medium. An advance that has a lot to owe to the genius of Steve Jobs and his Iphone/Ipad.
Second, the post was to once again show how the established art world (art market) is a small incestuous club that rarely steps out of it's own box to see great work being done all around them. Most major museums are working hard to promote concept over beauty- even if they do occasionally have a show of beautiful work they do everything they can to force their own agenda. A show on 'The Portraits of ________', becomes a comment on feminism, racism, or sexuality. Most art museums do not bother themselves with any discussions on aesthetics.

But I digress.
My friend Bruce Petrie is a local painter that does wonderful landscape paintings. I suggest you check out his work. He is also a well respected lawyer who I am very glad to call my friend. If you read this blog you know I am very sueable.
See his website here.

Bruce sent me one of his Ipad sketches. Despite being a digitally rendered image, it had breadth and beauty of the actual sketch. It is more than a photo of the sketch, it is an interpretation of the image. A visual note that has a lot of power. This image allowed Bruce to learn from a master and quickly, and cleanly take down the information. See his comment about using the iPad below.

i Pad drawing of Rubens Study, by Bruce Petrie, 2011.
"This summer I went to the National Gallery of Scotland and saw in person this Rubens "Study of a Head"....    so I did a study of the study.  One convenience for the traveling artist is that you can carry the tool with you without all the other supplies. The key thing about this, like every other tool, is the purpose to which it is put: i.e. not to elevate the electronic medium as an end in itself but as just one more tool in the paintcraft toolbox.  -Bruce"

Just to be careful, I am sure Bruce would want me to post the following disclaimer:
The views and opinions expressed in the above blog post are solely that of Richard Luschek and are not necessarily the views of Bruce Petrie. In fact, Bruce barely knows the guy. I mean come on, Luschek is a jerk.

Sunday, October 9, 2011

iCrap

After the very sad passing of Steve Jobs this week I wanted to do a post about his amazing influence not just on the computer industry, but on design and the arts. He made sure his product had both form and function. While I am typing this blog post on a PC, I have always loved the great products made by Apple. I very much plan on getting an iPad at some point to use as a teaching tool and as a digital sketchbook.

I check out ArtDaily.com pretty much everyday. Mostly I scan quickly for any good shows or current auctions of master paintings. More often than not there are articles that speak to my sense of beauty, then kick it in the groin and gouge out it's eyes. Some of the stories are so ridiculous you could not make them up.
Today it was an article about D H. I have mentioned him before on this blog. I am very confused as to why he is so popular and I will in fact not be using his name as that is exactly what he wants. The more I mention him here, the more he will come up in search engines. He will be mentioned as D H.
The article was announcing The North American Debut of D H's of "Fresh Flowers" at the Royal Ontario Museum. These "drawings on iPhones and iPads, an exhibition that reveals the artist’s extraordinary use of this novel new artistic medium and its impact on shaping visual culture today."
D H, Untitled, 10 June, 2010.

To be honest, they are not terrible, but it is interesting that this warrants a major museum show. It is a wonderful new medium and there are tons of artists using the Ipad to make sketches for both hobby and professional use. Just doing a Google search for "Ipad paintings" will bring up tons of interesting and well drawn work- not in museum shows. Of course their name is not D H and they do not write a ton of social BS to go with the work.
New York Artist David Kasan has actually gotten a lot of press on his beautiful and well crafted portraits on the iPad. He is even teaching workshops on his techniques. Here is a video of him at work.


While I do not have an iPad, I do similar drawings on my Nintendo DS.
Here is one of  mine. So, where is my museum show?
R L, Coffee Cup,  ‎October ‎05, ‎2010.

Monday, September 19, 2011

Here Comes the Judge

The Innocent Eye Test
Mark Tansey, 1981
Yesterday I had the honor of judging the 6th Annual Exhibition for the CPSA (Colored Pencil Society of America) District Chapter 119. The show was located in the Sharon Center in Sharon Woods and will be open September 17th 30th, from 10:00-5:00.
I have judged a few shows before and it is not an easy job. I was asked a few times at the opening if I worked in Colored Pencil. I do not. I have of course used them, but never for finished work. That being said, I judged the work under the same standards that I would when viewing any other work.
One does not need to bring in a cow to judge a painting of cows, as in the Mark Tansey painting above.

I gave a small talk at the show and I discussed my method for selecting the winners.
1)Composition. This is where I started in the process. Did the picture have a pleasing and lovely arranged abstraction of shapes on the page? Was there a good and strong center of interest?
2)Color. I think most good work has some Red, Yellow and Blue- meaning, is there color variety (unlike the painting above).  Now, I do not mean specifically those colors, but at least colors in those primary families. So more specifically, something Reddish, something Blueish, and something in the Yellow family.
In addition, the color arrangement should be harmonious and pleasing. Usually, one color is prominent, and the rest are there to feature the "star" color and help set it off.
3)Breadth and Atmosphere. This is the area where drawing and painting can separate itself from photography. If drawing it the interpretation of form, a successful piece must be considered in this way. By carefully managing the relative hardness and softness of edges, the painter can direct the eye and begin to create the illusion of form. I will say this was the one thing most difficult to find while judging this show. Colored pencil, by its very nature, lends itself to extreme detail and sharp edges. It can lead to an image that is hyper-focused and flattened. If I could pick any one thing lacking throughout the show, this would be it. A lot of work would have been greatly improved had there been more soft edges and atmosphere. I would imagine much of the work in the show was completed by copying photos, which are not form, but flat images. A lot of the work would have benefited from more study from life.
4)Subject matter was my final consideration. I did look at mood, story, and the clearness of the message. If I was at all confused about the subject of the picture, it got crossed off the list. While subject is important, it must be clearly stated through good composition, pleasing color, and breadth of treatment. To do otherwise would be like writing a book full of misspellings and bad grammar.
This was a good show and I had fun judging the show, meeting the artists and talking to them about their work- congratulations to all the winners.
First- Cecile Baird  "Twisted Lemon"
Second- Tom Kinarney - " In the Woods"
Third- Cheryl Metzger- "Puppy Dog Tales"
Honorable mentions:
Jean Malicoat- "On the Chopping Block"
Margi Hopkins " Hot Dog"
Marcia Greenwald " All That Jazz"
Nancy Pugliano "Cherries"
Janice Glaser "First Taste of Snow"

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Art Students- then and now.

The title of this blog post was going to be "OH MY GOD! WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON WITH THE WORLD?! WE ALL DESERVE TO DIE IN SOME SORT OF TERRIBLE AND PAINFUL FIERY APOCALYPSE!  SINNERS! SINNERS!!!"

I thought that title may be overly dramatic, so I went with  "Art Students -Then and Now".
Why am I all worked up again, you are asking. Well, today it started with a post I saw on the site ArtDaily.org. This is a site which posts the terribly infuriating and sad news of the arts today. "Why torture myself by reading this" you ask? Well, it does occasionally have some sort of interesting bits of news about  museum shows, artists, archeological discoveries or art auctions. The rest of the stuff .........

I am not a fan of BS. If I were I would have gone into politics.
Truth is beautiful in life and in art. I respect art and artists that follow that model. The rest I dare say borders on being evil. Most contemporary art today is closer to vandalism than it is anything else.

Just to set the tone: In reading a book on one of my favorite artists, Jean-Baptiste Chardin, there were some quotes by him discussing the hard work involved in becoming a painter. He talked being a young student in dusty academies with backs bent over drawing boards copying from the antique and from nature. The years and years of hard work he put into his studies  before he was able to paint beautiful pictures. The genius of Chardin owes much to the training and study he received.
Below is a painting by Chardin of an eager art student working diligently.
Fast forward 300 years.
Here is a photo I found today on Art Daily of art students in training.
These are students of the Royal Academy of Visual Art in The Hague, The Netherlands. 

Let me repeat that... " THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF VISUAL ART!"
Below we see the eager students "diligently" participating in a "Graphic Design workshop".  
They are hard at work with an improvised drawing tool. To quote directly from ArtDaily.org - "Pencils, pens and brushes are stuck to a vibrator that makes drawings on the paper. At the start of the new school year students participate in all kinds of workshops."

I bet they do.
I don't really have to say much more do I? This is not drawing, this is not training, nor does this fit my definition of "Royal" or "Academy". It is a self important playground for a culture with too much free time and too little respect for beauty and truth.

The only thing that should be vibrating on the end of a pencil is an eager and intelligent art student with respect and love for the world around them.

Of course there are schools out there that offer training similar to that received by Chardin. They are not in Universities, Academies or Colleges, they are private training studios. Though they are rarely, if ever mention on Art Daily.org. If you want good training, find artist you like and go study with them. If they hand you a sex toy during a drawing class, ask for your money back and contact your lawyer.

I am still waiting for that fiery Apocalypse.

Monday, June 20, 2011

BS Creator

I was recently asked to write an artist statement for a show I was to be part of. I declined and just sent the painting sans statement-The work speaks for itself-  at least it should. I could write some flowery prose that speaks the obvious, but I am not one to do that sort of thing. I like subtlety and truth. Artists statements do not usually contain either of those things. I suppose you could argue that I am not writing a relevant artist statement then. That I should take the time to craft a statement that has all the things I cherish.
I have done so. This time I suppose I was just not in the mood. 

Someone recently sent me a link to the following website with an artist statement creator that I found pretty entertaining. I thought I would share. Now if such an issue ever comes up again, I can use this technological marvel to create my own.
Click the following link:
INSTANT ARTIST STATEMENT


Here is a photo of some terrible artwork followed by one of these "artist" statements to help you understand it. It works!
"The above work explores the relationship between acquired synesthesia and urban spaces.
With influences as diverse as Nietzsche and John Cage, new synergies are crafted from both explicit and implicit meanings.
Ever since I was a teenager I have been fascinated by the traditional understanding of the human condition. What starts out as triumph soon becomes corrupted into a cacophony of greed, leaving only a sense of decadence and the prospect of a new beginning.
As shifting impressions become transformed through boundaried and personal practice, the viewer is left with an impression of the inaccuracies of our world."

Friday, April 22, 2011

I thought I would post these pie charts my friend Bruce Erikson sent me.
To be honest, as much as this chart is meant to be a cute joke, it is pretty much dead on. There are many folks calling themselves artists who could not draw their way out of a paper bag- many even teach college courses.
Interestingly, most painters that can draw and paint know that all good painting begins in the abstract. I good start on a painting should have accurate, color, value, and approximate placement. What I mean by approximate placement is that the basic composition, shapes of light and dark, should be down. Any strong reading edges are indicated, but much else is very loosely stated. The early stages of a painting are abstract. Let's get professorishy and state the dictionary definition of the work abstract: expressing a quality or characteristic apart from any specific object. So, it has the qualities of, but not the specifics. 
Now the fine art definition: of or pertaining to the formal aspect of art, emphasizing lines, colors, generalized or geometrical forms, etc., especially with reference to their relationship to one another.  Also a good description. It is about the shapes of value and color that make up a picture that will make up a likeness. Shapes and masses that do not add up to a likeness are not something I am interested in, to me it the equivalent to gibberish in writing. Just my humble opinion, which if you read this blog, you know is always right. 


Here is another funny pie chart. 
 If you have told anyone you are an artist, you have likely heard at least a few of these. Of course I would add the phrase "Too bad you ain't going to make no money till you be dead." 

Monday, April 4, 2011

Learning from old work

I was cleaning up in the basement today and found some folders of my old work. Most of the work I found from college and just after should be burned, the ashes beaten with sticks, the resulting mess shot with a machine gun, gathered up and flushed down the toilet of a poorly run Mexican restaurant, shut down by the Food and Drug administration before everyone involved is executed by ninjas. The work is that bad.

Though I found a few things I really liked. It is interesting when you see your innocent, untrained work and discover qualities that may be missing in current efforts. I feel like I have learned a thing or two since this drawing was done.  Now I have a need to finish and finesse work, fixing any thing that looks wrong or off. I will say that I may be losing something in that quest for visual truth. This drawing got me thinking; how to do that without loosing immediacy and energy.
Below is a self portrait from at least 15 years ago. Interestingly, I like a lot about it. I am not sure a self portrait done right now would have a similar feel.
It lacks form and good proportion, but it has personality. I had long hair then,roughed up into dreads  and the beard had some color. This is a drawing of me as a young hippy. I knew little to nothing when this drawing was done but I still like it. A self portrait today would not look like this. Of course it would be a drawing of a 41 year old and not a drawing of a 24 year old- big difference in subject matter, but I am thinking only of the works execution. How would the work look now.
I will have to work on a new self portrait to compare.
I should go through more of my old work to see what I can learn from hippy Luschek.

Sunday, January 16, 2011

The Mona Lisa Curse


I thought I would post a wonderful documentary by Time Magazine art critic Robert Hughes. It is a fascinating and depressing look into the contemporary art market that has led to piles of shallow art and armies of ignorant art collectors only concerned with making money on the investment. You will meet one of these intellectually asleep collectors in part 11. I have posted all 12 parts below.

As a painter today I am trying to figure out how to survive in today's market. Honestly, I am not sure what to do with this information just yet. The only idea I have come up with involves building a time machine to go back to the late 19th century, but that seems like a lot of work. 

A more realistic idea is to keep painting with the idea of creating beauty that will hopefully connect with people. I also hope to win the lottery.

























After you finish this series, I suggest you also watch Hughes series called American Visions, also on YouTube.