Does the act of painting necessarily result in
a painting? Are the two mutually inclusive? I feel like painting can end up
being very sculptural depending on what materials are used. If there are thick
materials used, the painting can end up being very thick, heavy, and bulky.
Does painting serve as the basis for other forms of art or stand on its own? Does it matter that we make a distinction? In my mind, this goes both ways. Many artist are beautiful delicate painters using only paint, and then on the other hand artists can add other bulky materials and it easily can turn into a sculpture with painting aspects.
Find three examples you feel best exemplify PAINTING with captions (artist, medium, date, size) and an explanation on WHY you chose these.

Jackson Pollock, Number 1, 1950 (Lavender Mist),1950
87x118 in, oil, enamel, and aluminum on canvas
I chose this piece because I
like the fact that this is an action painting and isn’t about the final
product. It’s about how it is made. The size of this painting is kind of
uncomprehendable.

William de Kooning was such a
perfectionist when it came to his paintings. Although these look very gestural,
he had a vision in mind and would stick to it. I like the color that he use.

Georgia O'Keeffe, Horse's Skull with White
Rose, 1931, Oil on canvas, 36 x 16 1/8 inches,
I chose this Georgia O’Keeffe
Painting because the black and white works so well. It makes the piece so
stunning. The shading makes the three dimensional.
No comments:
Post a Comment