Who is your favorite artist and why?

My favorite artist is Leonardo da vinci, I have to say one of my main reason he is my favorite artist is the way he makes so much life display in his muses eyes. There is so much depth and longing in the way the eyes tell a story. One day I would love to be able to see his master pieces in person



~ Glenda

For the painter, I am respectful. Excellent works I like, I wondder for one day can become the same as their painter.

I think practice make perfect, as long as one keeps working on their skills they will reach their artist peak. All that matters is what your art can do, in terms of how others see it or feel it.

Michael Angelo
Leonardo
Caravaccio
Italian Renaissance grand masters!

I would not mind being a mouse in a room full of these artist as they converse all their wisdom over wine, I'm sure they would be fascinating to listen too.

People are shocked, and some have gotten offended when I say that none of the classical artists, or even any today influence my work, nor am I inspired by them or moved by their work. In fact, I get bored. I am very serious when I say this.

I can only say that my favorite artist is myself. My work moves and inspires me to continue.

You might be disappointed, Glenda. Mona isn't all that big, its kept in low light behind glass and to see it you'll need to queue for a few hours and then get a look over a few heads. Try in winter. The queues are shorter.

I remeber when I first saw The Nightwatch by Rembrandt and was stunned by its beauty. Same with Monet's Lillies and Turners watercolours at the Tate.

Disturbed is probably my thoughts, Abdushakur. Understanding any art requires knowledge and a resistance to judge. It seems you might be lacking both. Relying on your own experiences for inspiration is a good thing but it lacks quality if those experiences are full of judgements. As my mother might have said to me when I was faced with eating green vegetables: "eat them, Tommy. You may not enjoy the experience but they will do you the world of good".

Disturbed is probably my thoughts, Abdushakur. Understanding any art requires knowledge and a resistance to judge. It seems you might be lacking both. Relying on your own experiences for inspiration is a good thing but it lacks quality if those experiences are full of judgements. As my mother might have said to me when I was faced with eating green vegetables: "eat them, Tommy. You may not enjoy the experience but they will do you the world of good".


You said, Understanding any art requires knowledge and a resistance to judge. It seems you might be lacking both.

Just because I have no favorite artists, especially the well known or famous variety, doesn't mean I don't know their work. This is an error and misconception on your part. You assume that because I have no favorites, I did not study art or the movements of the artists. As a matter of fact, the reason I have no favorites is because the work that is known, and the movements that have come and gone, which I have studied, are of no benefit to me and what my goal and mission as an artist are, if anything they are incompatible with what I am striving towards. My work is simply not inspired by any of it. I have a different source of inspiration. Perhaps in the past when I was illustrating and drawing cartoons, I would say that my major influence was Rembrandt and Crumb. But that is in a past that is gone, today, I do not hold these artists in any high regard.

You said, Relying on your own experiences for inspiration is a good thing but it lacks quality if those experiences are full of judgements.

And really, this makes no sense. All artists rely solely on their experience. Even a vicarious observation is a personal experience that one learns from. Also, you are assuming that all my experiences are judgmental. They may be judgmental now, but every artist has to discern himself from the rest and that is by being discriminating as an artist and art critic.

You are also assuming, that I am new to art or have no professional experience or schooling. Your comment makes many passive implications in order to rationalize your view which is what I was referring to in my initial post.

Other artists do not know how to handle my position as an artist, and then go off on tangents and assumptions. You should have asked questions instead of jumping to conclusions because otherwise, you become liable to exposing your naivety as an actual artist.

Thank you for your message.

I'm not an artist. I am a teacher.
I see in your approach, many of the qualities and ideals of those I have taught over the last 60 years.
You hold nothing new. What you say has been said before. Fortunately, those before you have either become more well informed, less self-centered and hold that which has gone before them as of value.

One does not need to radicalise to make a difference. Acceptance and tolerance are greater virtues than denial and rejection. It's not necessary to reject that of the past to make a difference to the future. Evolution takes place in small steps. Pushing aside that which we have become accustomed isn't the way to gain support.

So far, I haven't seen much of your art which would make me think differently. Perhaps you'll be able to share more and explain its purpose. In this way, I and others will learn from what you do and possibly see what your words mean.

Be cautious, my friend. Being alone is dangerous, either in thought or action. Gaining support requires ideas based on facts and data, not perceptions. What you say at the moment might well be true but until you can support it with the necessary facts, you're just talking rubbish.

I, in no way, suggested that you had no experiences or knowledge. It was your denial of their influence that I was referring to. I don't have 'favourites' either. Appreciation of anything requires us to detract from personal judgement and focus on what the artist is doing and what we can learn. You say that there is no benefit to you. Well, who cares? Certainly not the artist or me. It might concern you if you think you can make a difference without the benefit of those who have been before you.

Those who reject the present or the past have no future. Only those who accept the past and work with the present can hold hope for the future.
Regards
Tom