A Painter's Discourse

Encore. oil and oil stick on canvas. 30"x20". 202020

Written by: Chase King

The act of painting today is a mash-up of history. Isms such as symbolism, activism, expressionism, op-ism, realism, feminism, surrealism, futurism, etc. This aleatoric composite best describes contemporary painting today. A good organic painting or an intentionally bad painting is decided not by quality but by historical reference and purpose. That seems to be the direction contemporary painting is headed. With the assistance of social media, painting is experienced through photographs and interfaces no larger than a desktop screen. This very relationship between digital photographs and painting is something I consider to be inevitable regarding the way we interact with painting. However, this isn’t the ideal way to measure the value painting contributes to the broader art culture. Painters share an affinity with their medium. This white world paintings are created to exist in that we call galleries are accessible to the determined and dedicated. But the immeasurable time and energy put into a painting doesn’t really matter to the ones in charge. When it comes down to it, a painter’s success comes from his or her convictions.

I’m not denying the hierarchy that exists in the art market because it’s true. And it’s a constant fact throughout history. Usually, it’s money coupled with a particular clout bestowed upon individuals and committees that make the moves in our system. It is a cut throat and competitive game. Making a good painting isn't enough. It’s the painter himself the important people buy, not the painting. Fortunately though, the ones who survive the barrage of rejection and self-doubt, can be humbled by the other side of humanity. The ones who buy paintings because it provokes them. A stranglehold on the primal creative desires most people yearn to have in their life. Or, to just fill up some wall space in the home. Regardless, painters must be committed to their craft and where it comes from. Never really losing sight of that is why painting continues to conquer. Having the audacity to paint poorly or reject the status quo style is applaudable, especially to a well informed painter. Public opinion is as valid as its information. Seeing more of the giants and masters of painting side by side with contemporary artists is something any reputable museum and/or gallery should consider more of. Most of these institutions pride themselves on minority and cultural inclusiveness so this shouldn’t be too difficult, money and donorship aside. If that’s even possible. Skill and talent have been considered pre-requisites for painters up until the turn of the 20th century. This idea that deskilling is ruining the value of painting is valid but not without bias. Painting should be viewed primarily from an art historical point of view and museums, galleries and the like need to do a better job representing this notion. To see a Eugene Delacriox and a R.B Kataj or a Peter Paul Rubens and a Genieve Figgis is far too important not to view side by side. Name, titles, medium and year are enough for any person willingly visiting an art museum or gallery to make a decision about what they are looking at. To assume painting is a progressive act by mere subject matter and technique is incorrect from today’s perspective. Painters produce a non-functional physical commodity known to invoke controversy, opinion and emotion. At face value, that is progressive but that commodity is organic and subject to change as it exists though eras. A painting made to grab attention and paralyze all preconceived notions of form and style, current beliefs or opinions is what makes painting so effective.Time is the true judge of a painter and a painting’s worth.

Adhering to some fundamental rules may be necessary while living as a painter but good or bad painting isn’t the issue at hand today. Any problems in painting that have arisen during the post WWII, mid-twentieth century and twenty-first century in America are of socio-political origins. What is meant by this is that a painter is naturally an appropriator of their realities. Information and data bombard our daily lives like never before, and this isn’t exclusive to just painters, but we can’t help but to evaluate all matters. The paradigm that once controlled much of the painter’s dogma of the past, the schools of thought and styles, are now waning, phasing into a more eclectic array of perspectives, hence, aleatoric. Painting survives in the face of screens and computer technology because of its vulnerability and origins. It’s very absence in daily culture is what keeps it alive today. Painting is the most democratic of all art forms because of its adaptability with time and era. It’s steeped in art history. Footers dug and concrete poured long before painting became a form of art coined by the intellectuals. Painting is an indivisible form of art that will continue to experience comradery and objection for as long as people think critically. Paintings have the ability to transcend expectations of their creator. By working on multiple paintings at once, I can see similar marks and motifs occur. The subject matter becomes less important and the work establishes itself as an autonomous picture. References and ideas got it started. Clues and traces can be found from the beginnings but what was before is now metamorphosed into something unforeseen and unimagined. Currents is at this stage. It may not be Currents in the end, but I find it intriguing that the work is taking me for a joyride. Where I stop is determined by my own assurance as a painter.

_____

Chase King is a painter based in Woodstock, Georgia. He received a Bachelors of Fine Arts from Kennesaw State University in 2017 and has been exhibiting his work regionally and nationally for ten years. You can view Chase's work at his website or instagram, @chasekingart