December 16, 2006
Monthly Question: The Self Taught
Recently an interesting question came up about the use of the term "self-taught" artist. While visiting Matt Sesow' show at Rebus works, Shonna Greenwell's face became quite troubled at some poorly expressed (and unfortunately, forgettable) point the artsrambler had uttered. Her exclamation paraphrased was: I don't think "self-taught' artists are ignorant.
Wow, what WAS that thing I said? Yet it is an interesting question: the perception of the "self-taught' artist. For some, the term conjures up the eloquence of William Edmonson and Edgar Tolson. An early influence in the rambler's formative years was Adolf Wolfi, a profound genius who suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. For me these artists hold the truths. They are Masters.
Rebus works' "self-taught" artists include the current and excellent Matt Sesow show, a man who is self-versed in the works of Basquiat as well as in a world of other artists and genres. He approached the pieces and asked himself the quesions that opened his world as an artist (a method, by the way, we have always suggested for any patron of the visual arts.) Shonna also mentioned other artists, in our discussion, that were very schooled–just not art schooled.
Is that the key? Art School. [In September we recorded the opinions of many about how to skill the creative person to be an artist in this world.]
What about those who are formally educated on their own. I can think of many examples here, non art-school educated people who know more about techniques and materials than I can ever hope to remember.
Shonna and I agreed that labels really are just that–labels. They are unimportant. Yet she does use them–perhaps feels forced to use them– just to communicate to the public. If we use them, forced or not, let's define our terms. And there are so many of these terms. A glance at my library reveals Naive Art, Outsider Art, Art Brut, Artistry of the Mentally Ill, Shamanic Art, and on and on and on.
Artsramble would very much like to read your input here. Who are the self-taught artists? (Where can I sign up?)
[link]
7 Responses to “Monthly Question: The Self Taught”
1. Constance Pappalardo Says:
November 22nd, 2006 at 11:48 am e
I will be the first to raise my (trembleing) hand here. I consider myself to be a “self-taught” painter. Yes, I studied at The Art Student’s League and did a stint at The School of Visual Arts in NYC but I never stayed long ebough to get “the papers”. I was always too impatient, having more ideas than tecnigue, I raced through classes to get to the point, how do I use this and that in order to express what seemed so desperate to come out.
When I look back 30 years, I wish I had not felt such urgency. I wish I had been patient and deciplined. I went to see Olga Kalashnikova’s show at The Russian Gallery last week. She is a master of Russian Realism and yet, she has mastered her skill to such an extent that the emotion you feel from her painting transcend the precition.
I have made peace with it all and now, at 50, I see life is too short to start over. I work hard at what I do and strive to improve within that realm.
I am a self-taught artist and so long as I continue to learn and grow… I need not be ashamed.
Con
2. Tom Starland Says:
November 22nd, 2006 at 1:51 pm e
On the subject of “self-taught” artists I would suspect that the practice of calling artists who are without the “papers” and “letters” to call themselves “real” artists came from the halls of academia. In most cases if you stand the works of a really good self-taught artist next to works produced by a really good artist with the BFA and MFA degrees - you wouldn’t be able to tell any if much difference - as long as you’re comparing apples to apples.
My biggest concerns with the self-taught, visionary, outsider, whatever, artist is their use of materials. Some are using materials to paint on and paints that won’t last long after your purchase the work. Without the education about stable materials and mixing and matching of materials - I find myself concerned about what I would be paying for and how long it would last. But then again - having a degree doesn’t mean you’re going to use good materials - does it.
I’m reminded of a conversation between a gallery owner and a visionary artist who was going to be able to bring in a new batch of works - the artist had just come across a new found stash of plywood to paint on.
With some of these artists - those without the papers or letters - you have to wonder - would a formal education help or hinder their creativity?
Mostly I don’t think it matters - the proof is in the work. And, whether it is worthy of purchase - well that’s up to the buyer.
3. inox_art Says:
November 22nd, 2006 at 5:32 pm e
What’s wrong with being ignorant? I take pride in creating art that has not been influenced by the work of others. Mind you, I don’t have a whole lot in my life that I do take pride in, but my art is all mine! I’m not sure Tom would consider it art since it’s not painting, but that seems to be a wide spread prejudice and I will get over it.
4. Tom Starland Says:
November 25th, 2006 at 9:39 am e
Tom here again for clarification. Nowhere in my comments do I mention that artists need to be influenced by other artists or even knowledgable of their history. In fact, it’s one of the problems I see with university art departments - turning out lesser clones of professors - especially those who teach the - watch me and learn to be an artist technique. Which is another subject. My only problem was with artwork produced of “materials” which might not hold up through the test of time. Buyers should expect the art they buy to last a certain amount of time - unless it is sold as temporary art.
As far as being myopic when it comes to painting - I wouldn’t try and figure out what my art collection would be like by statements made here or looking in the pages of my paper. Our collecting history started with pottery and now includes sculpture, glass, fiber, photography, fine art prints, and paintings - no Paintings-R-Us here.
Remember the subject was self-taught artists - ignorant by not being formally trained. I said I’m not sure it matters. One of my favorite artist, William Halsey of Charleston, SC, who was formally trained, but in his 80’s was still trying to get back to a state of “childlike” innocence. He felt that an artist needs to learn the basics and then learn to break all the rules. What’s to say you can’t start out that way?
As a collector of art I just don’t want to be burned by an artist who is ignorant about the use of materials in the creation of a work and suffer for it in the passing of time. Hence my example of a self-taught, outsider, visionary, etc. artist who was painting on found plywood - not a fictional story. Some of these artists have been known to create on anything they find in front of them. But I also said that just because an artist is formally trained it doesn’t mean they will use good materials.
But thanks for your comments - I think this kind of dialog is what the folks at Arts Ramble are all about. I’m not formally trained in the arts myself - I have to base my comments on my experience in covering the visual arts.
5. Antonio Rivera Says:
December 1st, 2006 at 1:32 pm e
As far as I am concerned anyone can learn the craft aspects of any art form…But Tom makes important points about proper materials.
What can not be self-learned is what art is? I disagree with notions that propose ‘that art is anything anyone claims as art.’ The more important question about self-learning, is what an artist is?
In my opinion (and by the way I am more than three quarters self taught as an artist) an artist is a particular type of individual who chooses art media as a form of expression for their world view. But what is really important here is having and owning a world view. By owning I mean having deep feelings and committments or put another way, to have a genuine belief in how one sees and relates to the world which is communnicated through the art. Art is not about ideas we have about the world, hundreds of ideas come into our minds every day…Ideas are cheap, beliefs and art are dear.
tony rivera
6. sesow Says:
December 3rd, 2006 at 11:26 am e
Hi all,
Matt Sesow here…. I received a “google alert” that my work had been mentioned in this blog. Thank you for the kind words on my work at Rebus in Raleigh. I have a good working relationship with Shonna.
Anyways, I like to consider myself a “Self-Teaching” artist. I don’t have art school training… but I do have a BS in Computer Info. Systems from the University of Tulsa. I worked several years as a software engineer at IBM, AOL, Netscape and some “dot coms”.
I started painting in 1994 (5 years after receiving my BS) as a hobby. In 2001, I started living entirely off the sales of my paintings. Additionally, i have served in the Peace Corps (Solomon Islands) and “Geek Corps” (Bulgaria). I have painted in every continent except Antarctica.
My painting heroes are Sue Coe, Basquiat, De Kooning, and Francis Bacon. I don’t like many other painters and I had never heard of the term Outsider Artist before I was called one… which I don’t think I am.
Since materials seem to be of some concern in the the discussions here, I taught myself what to use by talking to employees at art supply stores here in DC, some art students, and by backwards engineering (visually) some of the great art we have here in Washington, DC that I can visit for free.
To read more about and see my paintings, please visit http://www.sesow.com/new.htm
I update the page at least 4 times a week with new work.
Also you can read “why” I started painting and the reasons I continue to paint by via some of the press at http://www.sesow.com/press.htm
my best and thanks for looking,
Matt
7. Andrea Gomez Says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 10:18 am e
I came across an interesting article on artnet. It might serve as an overview about contemporary artists with diagnosed mental conditions who express themselves in art.
http://www.artnet.com/Magazine/features/karlins/karlins1-21-05.asp
I’m not suggesting that outsider art is all about diagnosed mental conditions. However there is a category of outsider art that does consider just this.
On the other hand, maybe someday in the future the world will be of the opinion that all artmaking is a manfestation of some diagnosed mental condition.
All work on this site © 2004 by Andrea Gomez, all rights reserved. Unauthorized copying, reproduction, republishing, posting or duplication of any of the material on the web site is prohibited without express written permission from Andrea Gomez. The artist reserves to herself all rights of reproduction and all copyright of her work.
Obsessively updated regularly. Last update: June 13 , 2007
Artsramble Archive