Still working from 'Expressive Drawing' (http://aimoneartservices.com/expressive-drawing-book-/view/378), the next next chapter in the book related to drawing
textures.
The book pointed out that in drawing practice there is very little actual texture –
you're not creating indentations in the surface of the paper, you're
aiming to create the impression of texture, conjuring up an image of
texture. Up until now I've always thought of texture as something
that is descriptive – I observe what's in front of me and
try to describe it through pencil, graphite and charcoal marks. What
is new to me is the idea of metaphorical texture – arranging
line and mark to describe the internal world of
emotion/psyche/spirit. As the book says “It makes the invisible
visible, the intangible tangible.”
As I worked through this, all sorts of
bells started ringing in my head. Matisse and Klee both talk about
delving below the surface into the invisible, of seeking to capture
the emotion one feels about a subject rather than visible reality.
Kandinsky advises that the artist must express what is peculiar to
himself; his eyes should be directed to his own inner life and ears
turned to the voice of 'internal necessity'. In his early abstract
phase Diebenkorn would routinely reject and destroy paintings that
owed too much to the visible world. I know my sketching tends to the
'observational' – I've always thought it is important to capture in
a sketch what I see at the time. While this is clearly influenced by
the mood I'm in at the time, I cannot pretend that my sketches are a
full-blown emotional response to a subject.
So the idea of 'metaphorical texture'
interests me greatly!
Let's unpick this a little. It seems to
me that to create metaphorical texture one has to set down one's own
idiosyncratic marks to describe how one feels about the essence of
the subject one is drawing. Abstract artists like Klee created their own language of marks. If we think that all subjects have
hidden depths, we can also recognise that as we observe them we subconsciously bring our own
experience into play – what we know or have learned about them, how
we have experienced them at first hand, the extent to which we feel
comfortable with them/feel unsettled by them/are anxious about them.
And I suppose my aim should be to create a personal vocabulary to convey
the hidden depths that I see.
Anyway, the exercises in the book were designed to get
me thinking about different textures and drawing these. Then I had to
create textures that expressed different emotions. This was my attempt.
Finally, I had to
draw textures from observation without attempting to draw the reality
of the objects. (I can see that this is a potential route to invisibility.) I sat in the dining area with the table and the fire and drew this, a bit like a sampler.
I found it quite difficult, not drawing the objects. From this last drawing I then had to compose a further drawing using
only the textures I had captured.
I think this particular set of
exercises sits at the heart of moving from realism to abstraction. I
think I should return to it in the future.
In the meantime, to give my head a rest, I finished the day by
drawing a Scots Pine that I could observe from my window. I've always been
dissatisfied with my previous attempts to draw a Scots pine tree, but this
time I tried to focus on the quality of the pine needles and the
cloudy appearance of the foliage, thinking about the invisibility of
the tree. I thought it turned out quite well and that it's a little different from my other sketches. I thought I could detect
some influence from my drawing session. Maybe I'm beginning to let go from realism a little. What do you think?
I will return to this again soon!
.jpg){kind=spacer}
.jpg)
.jpg)
