Gary Kelly a conservative artist
Reading Create Magazine and I notice this painters work. He goes by the name Gary Kelley. The vast majority of artists are….. well….. not artists. Their work lacks something very important in order to be an artist. True works of art reek of absolute perfection in the execution of their chosen style. A ‘true’ artist takes his craft very serious and understands that greatness is not easy. In fact it’s work.
This stems from the fact that developing a near perfect style requires a great deal of problem solving. In the case of painting one must repeatedly figure out how each stroke, use of light, use of color, and composition will ultimately effect the final piece. To master these elements requires an artist awareness of what they want to see on canvas and what their current incarnation lacks in that vision. Once the artist realizes how this current piece lacks certain elements they begin the process of discovering what techniques they can employ to bring about their vision in their next work. The process of creating art is very difficult and absolutely arduous.
That being said, the vast majority of the art I encounter is absolute crap. You can tell the artist does not understand the basic principle of awareness and modification. Rather, they believe that once they get out some paint on canvas and that is left is to call it ‘art’ and it is transformed into this mystical piece arcane beauty. Sorry, this shit is just crap and your are not an artist, just a liberal. Real art is taking responsibility for making reality your vision. A real artist is a conservative.
The reason I call this to your attention is because as I’m scanning his art I form some hypothesis about him. First he considers his profession to be real actual work. Not something fun you do. Not something the liberal says is work because they are ’serious’ about getting their ‘vision’ out. No its work, cause you have to sit there and figure out a way to emulate your vision on canvas. And that is not easy. Confirming this hypothesis he states:
Art is Work - that’s a pretty honest statement.
Furthermore, because his style is so well developed I know that he understands the necessary process of awareness and modification in creating art. Such great style only can be attained when you become aware of failing to make your vision a reality and learn what modifications in techniques are necessary to bring about a closer reproduction of your vision. He also confirms this by saying:
Creativity is assembling influences. It’s not about having something totally original pop into you head all of a sudden. Creativity is using what you can get your hands and wrap your head around and then processing it
Good artist know what is required to bring about art. Strong work ethic combined with a healthy dose of problem solving will eventually yield beautiful works of art. Art produced without hard work and empirical knowledge is not art.
April 28th, 2005 at 12:22 pm
I see that you have fallen into the trap, that if you don’t like it it is not art, but it is crap….(that simplistic logic is crap)….The art picture is a still life ( photo) that someone has stylisted and while very interesting is but one sensory activator in the world of “art”. Try to expand you adventure into art and forget about the photo stylising for a little while or at least until i can fetch my cannon image collector and fhotoshop manipulater and conservotor cash register.
Trampage
April 29th, 2005 at 10:19 am
I’m wondering if we showed you a series of Gary Kelly’s works before you read this article, if you would have coined him the conservative artist all the same and had this fit of masturbation. How, without hearing explanations and descriptions from the artist’s own words, would you go about evaluating an artist’s work? Are you capable of comparing works with respect to time and not only being able to determine an artist’s unique, subjective ‘vision’ and figuring out how it is that that artist must work to achieve the transformation of that ‘vision’ into reality, but also being able to see the artist’s mistakes in earlier works and evidence that she has taken ample time and put forth ample effort in overcoming those mistakes?
And if so…yeah, it must be great having that acute awareness, but not being able to make it come forth as a successful artist. Someone should write an aphorism about a distinction like that.
April 29th, 2005 at 11:35 am
To make this whole story invalid: The picture depicted here, the picture you guys just talked and wrote and philosophied and whatever about, THIS PICTURE IS A PICTURE PAINTED BY EWARD HOPPER, and it’s called CAR. Any further need for debate????????? Again - Edward Hopper, NOT some Gary or Kelly or whomever.
April 29th, 2005 at 11:39 am
I was wrong. It is indeed Kelly, but Hopper’s picture is almost identical. SORRY.