#18 Breach in the Bubble [20×38″ @300 dpi], 3/5/017.
This one is in exactly the same technique as the last one, below.

#17 Untitled in B&W

And something that’s curious is how different these two are from another black and white image I did 10 pieces ago. Have a look at #8.

#8 In a Globe of Frogs

The earlier piece is less contrasty, textured, and in close. There are two reasons for the differences. One is just the brush and brush settings I used. Recently I was watching some videos about the painter, Daniel Richter, who I didn’t know of, but is like a scarier version of Peter Doig. Just an aside, it’s rather surprising that I haven’t encountered some living painters that I’d like until recently. And, surely, none of them have seen my work. Painters just don’t get the media attention/recognition that conceptual or political artists get. Anyway, he was talking about changing up his style simply by changing media, or palette, or tools. This, I find, is very true. And how much easier that is to do digitally than with analogue mediums.

The other reason for the changes is just that my head is in a different place. Sometimes even when I try to work in the same style for two or three pieces, I end up going off in another direction. For me, this is desirable. A signature style is never the end goal, but rather continual exploration.

Recently I not only think it’s bizarre that someone like Jackson Pollock could work for so long with such a limited range of visual options (no subject matter, no composition, no chiaroscuro, no blending of colors, and just dripped arcs), but even some of my favorite painters, like Francis Bacon. However, if one is going to be corralled in a signature style, much better to be a broad one like Bacon’s than a critically narrow one like Pollock’s (which is not to say I’m not a fan).

With these pieces I keep tinkering with the formula, or recipe,  and the process. As I said, this is a huge advantage in working digitally because I don’t, for example, have to go out and buy a new set of paints or brushes. Of course, working with traditional mediums has its own advantages, but not for my lifestyle, living as an expat in S.E. Asia. No place to work, store pieces, and I’d have to ship them. Igadz!

I’m planning one or two or three more B&W pieces, but, I realize some of the weaknesses of this particular recipe, and am going to experiment with something a little different.

Stay tuned.

4 replies on “New Art: (#18) Breach in the Bubble

  1. Eric,
    I like both of these two black and white ones a lot. Better than the other black and white one. They have a little Klimt feel to me. I don’t think black and white is weaker than color, just different and on this last one I think it would probably take something away from the painting. I like the direction your work is heading at the moment. Luckily for you I’m not part of the scene so that’s not the kiss of death. Just one artists opinion.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks, Matt. I’m glad you like those. I also like them better than the earlier one.

      The one I’m working on now is the same technique, basically, but in color. However, the outcome is very different. The surprise is it’s not more difficult, at least this run, to do it straight in color.

      Anyway, sometimes I can see my work as if from the eyes of another, and from another framework, in which case they are hopeless because of how traditional they are at core, coupled with my subject matter. In other words, they don’t occupy a rhetorical space that is compatible with the main tenants of contemporary art, at least as I was taught it.

      Even the painters that are recognized, like Peter Doig, or Daniel Richter (who I just discovered) do mural sized canvases, which are highly salable one-of-a-kind physical objects. That seems to be a prerequisite.

      I have all the reasons I’ve already articulated why my art makes perfect sense for me, but, people who reject this kind of straight-up painting tradition with categorically dismiss it.

      So, that’s why it’s great to know when I reach others, other than myself.

      I really appreciate your following this series, and there’s but one other guy who regularly makes comments. You are both well informed on art, practice art, and are visually literate. But the latter I mean you can enjoy a painting they way people enjoy food: to delect upon it.

      This is a critical thing because for me it’s how I enjoy visual art. It’s not about the ideas, and certainly not in and of themselves. And this thing is completely absent in contemporary art theory.

      Also, been watching some good art videos on YouTube. Really enjoying brushing up on my pre-modern art.



  2. Another gem – something suggestive of religion about this one (could be me). I like the changes in style – they’re all recogniseably by you, so it’s like a kind of art barometer (or something – forgive me I’ve not had much sleep).

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Oh, thanks man. I’m really glad to hear they are recognizably all by me. On that note, I haven’t made a new one in a week because I’ve been trying to do a more deliberate, staged, controlled, piece. Much as I’d like to finish it and see the result, I can’t stand the process. Then, I just started working more spontaneously again, and within 10 minutes I’m liking what I’m seeing. so, I guess in this series I’m also zeroing in a bit on a stylistic range that works best for me.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s