For me this is right on! It feels authentic, in that the artist didn't apply candy-color to dress it up, but kept it real. The foreground is rich enough to stimulate my juices, and the background is peaceful enough to make me want to visit this place. In fact, I feel like I've experienced the pleasure of the land.

Yes...I agree...it is authentic! I can feel and smell the air. I want to pick up a stone and skip it over the water. I'm waiting for a heron to land. My soul feels peace. Very few paintings move me like this.

Quite an elegant composition. Essentially an X with the foregound rising hunk of land going from lower left to 2/3 of the way to the right and the M shaped rock formation being the point or focus of interest and the implied crossing of the arm that starts with elongated pool of tidal water pointing to the break in the horizon land line with the left hunk of horizon land right at the 2/3 distance from the right ... perfect golden means layout. One could see it as a Z that implies receding distance as the right to left arm of the X is only suggested. One can take any rectangle and strike a diagonal from corner to opposing corner and bisect the other angle such that the bisecting line meets the diagonal at a right angle (90') or perpendicular and where these 2 lines meet drop a vertical line representing the "golden mean" or slightly fat 1/3 mark. This rendering of low tide at Hesquiat bay achieves that on both sides with the rock pile and the length of horizon land on the left and the horizon line itself cutting the painting into 2/3 - 1/3 sections. Those early Greeks knew what they were doing when designing their buildings and thus were able to achieve a quiet power with their structures and this artist, whether intentional or not (it is happening so well I feel certain it is) has achieved a quite similar sense of authentic presence or quiet power. By staying low key in the color choices the artist assists the structure assuming dominance. I particularly enjoyed your descriptions of authenticity as they suggest for me a lovely posture for appreciating art free from polemics. Keep it coming Robert, you are one of the bright spots on the art horizon. Sincerely Charles ___ charlespeck.com

Excellent design is #1 and the horizontal view that we actually see when looking at a landscape. The color is dependent on value, hence the good design.

I think both of the viewers you observed made valid points. Yes, the piece is "authentic", well conceived and well executed. It's power, though is largely in it's simplicity of design and bountiful use of negative space. Thus, the man's comment that "there's less to this than meets the eye" is also true. While it may not have been meant as a complement, it is actually an acknowledgment that this is a case where less is more.

It's not the sort of painting I like - it's too cool, it doesn't grab me emotionally, which is what I like a painting to do. But, yes, I can stand back from my own prejudices enough to see that it's certainly authentic and I envy the artist's skill and technique.

As you said it is a matter of opinion... or rather point of view... or rather what strikes each person. Each person is going to have a different take on a painting. Those with more of an eye will be attracted, perhaps, to works with better balance, contrasts and depth. Those novices will take time to learn about these "qualities" as you rightly say. Neither are off base. Both are valid. Many artists cannot accept this. I think the more mature are more accepting of this discrepancy, or rather difference. Personally I like the painting, as a matter of fact quite a bit. Regardless of all the analytical numbers mentioned by Peck (a kind of picky math analysis), the work has balance... but what I like most is that it is peaceful, calm, and I can walk well into the work and spend time in it. These are not qualities everyone likes. So... it is a very personal thing--whether or not it strikes one. Thanks.

Amazing! I went to look at the painting and nearly passed over it with my mouse but noticed the depth of quality even in the instant that it flew past my screen. I'm not even a painter; I'm a sculptor but the "authenticity" as you called it captured me immediately. As I attend opening show after show I devour the comments made by visiting customers for their reactions as well. SOmetimes it is even more informing to listen to those from people who don't yet know that I am hearing their comments about my sculptures as they speak with their companions or other artists. They need not be trained and practiced sculptors to recognize what THEY like just as I appretiated the painting Low Tide 1/94. I simply have strived for years to advance my art skill and it has anabled me to discern the strong from the weak in other art works. The sucessful in any field are likely to be able to recognize success in other fields of work.

Once when I was a callow arrogant youth at school a poet came to visit. He read us some of his poems and invited questions. He was called Norman Nicholson. I suggested to him that poetry involved power and social conscience and fury. To which he replied that Yes, it can but what mattered was Authenticity. He went on to say that Ted Hughes was a poet with a loud strident voice - He shouted - whereas he was a quieter voice, murmuring to his readers. He said they were both nature lovers, both authentic and both had valid styles to make their voices heard. This painting murmurs and it is beautiful. I have never forgot these hushed words of wisdom.

To quote Da Vinci: "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication". However, I cannot respond emotionally to an image of a painting like I can and often do when standing in front of the real thing. I appreciate seeing images as they convey far more than words can but they don't reproduce the experience of seeing the original nor do they necessarily suggest what that experience may be like. Liron www.liron.com

Looking in the dictionary for the definition of the word 'authenticity', I found it meant "the genuineness or truth of something". This painting expresses to me the experience of standing on the shore of a sea at the glorious moment of sunrise or sunset.

After reading some of the comments on Authenticity a question came to mind. Are we confusing authenticity with quality, realism, or just what strikes our fancy? I've had people comment so differently while looking at the same painting, I have to agree that it comes down to a matter of opinion. Authenticity belongs to our Creator, we are all just imitators and dreamers and try to express ourselves through art hoping others will catch our vision.

I would really like to see this painting in person. So quiet, no flash - a very strong composition born of mastery. And the scale is large. I can imagine the painting must be quite powerful in a subtle way. The other day a friend and I were examining works of one artist at an art opening here in Memphis, TN. My friend who is a dancer was admiring the early works of the artist whose work was on display. These early works were quite tight and controlled. I was surprised my friend liked them so much as I know her to be a believer in free gesture and I shared my surprise. "But," she explained "it is this rock solid foundation in drawing and composition this artist has that made the freedom and gestural quality of the later works possible." And she was right. Mastery of the elements is what I see in this painting.

Authententic vs realistic abstraction: The work of art is well concieved and rendered using a beautifully restrained pallette. I was at once caught up in the instinctual beauty of earth's light minglinging upon morning upper latitudes, having visited those states all too briefly, and living more daily with neap tidal lights and darks. Authentic? Why THIS painting among others viewed at the museum, is my question. I do fall beneath the musings of the painting, for sure. It is wonderful. How is it that THIS painting stands out so directly compared with all other paintings hung for viewing? I am taken in by its beauty and abstractions, I identify with the scene I once saw and took into myself on a trip, and I am still confounded how THIS picture is something more than others. Was there not one or two more "authentic" beauties in that museum? Ann

I have been fortunate to have seen Takao Tanabe's exhibit in the Vancouver Art Gallery; and I find that he is not only "authentic", but genuinely beautiful in his heart and soul. He paints what I love--the incredible West Coast of B.C. I am proud to live on Vancouver Island, not far from him.

I like Toni Stevenson's contribution of the dictionary definition of authenticity... Takeo Tanabe's works often seem like they are focused on something just past the edge of the visible horizon. The U of Regina has one of his early prairie landscape pieces which was displayed at the end of a long hallway in the campus residence. Back when I was an art student at the U of R, I tried the exercise of staring at the painting from the far end of the hallway, a couple of hundred feet at least, and maintained that view as I slowly walked to the painting until I was practically nose to canvas... it was a profound experience. This occurred almost 30 years ago, yet remains burned into my memory. I think that anyone who genuinely strives for the 'truth of something' will succeed in producing something memorable in their work.

I feel this painting evokes mystery. What lies beyond that blank space in the background? I also love the little bit of sun in the foreground.

Takao Tanabe's painting is "perfect" in the sense that your eye follows an interesting path around it. It is well executed, the technique appears to be perfect. It has a quiet perhaps soothing presence because of the muted colours. However, if it was in the same exhibition as one of yours, Robert, I would choose yours! Why? Because I like excitement, colour, movement in a painting. To each his own!

I would like to respond to the comment "there's less here than meets the eye". I think this "criticism" inadvertantly defines what (for me) makes good art: when an artwork is somehow MORE than the sum of its parts. When a simple juxtaposition of formal relationships "meets the eye" as a deeply felt, nuanced composition of surprising complexity.

Having taken several Oriental Painting workshops over the years, all of the elements of this kind of painting, such as simple design, fall naturally into this painting. I also see quite a lot of a Canadian artist that I admire, Tony Onley, in this peice.

I love this painting. To me it is very Zen. I would like to see more of this artist's work.

It's beautiful. It's serene. I want to stay in the place it depicts. It is magic right here in our midst. We've all been to this place and maybe not appreciated it.

A recent exhibit at the MacKenzie Gallery in Regina made a point that in "European" landscape there are no people while in Innu landscape there is no land. For some, authenticity has to do with the inter-relationship between humans and their physical, mental, social, spiritual and psychological environment. For us, a dehumanized landscape has no authenticity at all.

I once followed a tour group around a Japanese art exhibit at the ROM in Toronto. Their leader told them that, in Japanese painting, what is left out is at least as important as what is there - if not more so. I don't know if Mr. Tanabe is Japanese, but his painting proves the point - at least to me. Another way of putting it might be to say that he knew when to stop. I would kill to be able to hang this painting in my own little hovel and gaze at it day after day for years to come! Being a Type A+, I need the serenity of paintings like this.

Seeing Mr. Tanabe's work and the following comments brings to mind a statement often said to me. "A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS". There was a time when I would have nodded my head in agreement believing how true this statement seems based on what I've experienced. But now, with all the media, the flood of images available on the Internet and information overload we receive from so many sources, I was wondering if this is still the case. At one time, when I had limited information and my brain wasn't stuffed with experiences, pictures, photos, sites and information, I looked at a picture and immediately thought I got the message. It seemed clear to me what the image was trying to say. But is that really the case? Was I actually getting it or was I, as we all do, seeing what we wanted to see? I've since learned that if twenty people look at a picture, it's quite probable to get twenty different opinions of what is being looked at. Also, how certain are we that we are getting what was intended by the image maker? I've sold many paintings and I can't tell you the amount of times and the multitude of responses I received from viewers. Some tell me I capture the mood, or the expression was right on the mark. Sadness, moodyness, love, happiness, quiet comtemplation, or whatever. I didn't paint the image with those moods in mind. I was probably just painting an interesting face with some terrific light source. Or I was in my stoic phase. Or she was the woman who showed up for session that day. Maybe the "words in my picture" were misleading, or gave a message that will differ with every viewer. A very different message is being perceived by every person. Maybe that's the true purpose of art. Evoke a feeling no matter what is. I give much thought to naming my paintings appropriately, but I wonder in so doing am I not cutting off some contact with some people in the process. A connection to someone who will look at this piece and not respond due to the name I've given it. Maybe we should never give names to paintings. They could just be 1,2,3. I've given names to paintings only to find the client calls it something related personally to them. Something they see that I didn't. My "girl in chair" of instance becomes "the pensive moment". Or whatever they see in it. Mr. Tanabe's painting is undoubtedly beautiful and well painted. One can say "authentic" (whatever that may mean to you) but the message will differ with every viewer and not necessarily be what Mr. Tanabe intended. In the end the message may not matter. The connection he makes with the viewer is what ultimately matters.

" 'There's less to this than meets the eye,' he said." Yes!! And THAT is the hallmark of a truly accomplished artist. One who has the ability to give the impression of much more than is actually put down. One who has the confidence to let the viewer add the details. One I wish I could emulate a bit more often . . .

Hi folks, yes it was a particulary picky, math kind of analysis and for that I ask for a pardon please. The picture of the painting is not the sort that normally gets to me but there did seem to be this quiteness that was alive so I thought about it some more and the abstract design just kinda jumped at me. Turns out all that mumbo jumbo about angles (though true) doesn't work out on this picture when I decided to break out the straight edge and check it out. Just seemed that way when I looked and guessed. It may be odd but I almost always calculate the abstract patterns of any gestural and/ or realistic work I do (of course with abstract work by definition). Sort of sets the stage not unlike a writer using descriptive terms to flesh the argument and direct the readers response (lip gloss, striped shirt, carrying the overcoats, etc). I was going to work the idea of synergy (the whole being more than the sum of the parts) off the statement "there is less here than meets the eye" but the rock solid fundamental design just spoke louder to me and others picked up on it anyway. Even a natty dresser may be lucidly incisive, Degas, Wilde, Hugo, Baudelaire, and Tom Wolfe come to mind as examples. Even though I have no idea of the impact this work would have seen in person the photograph of it evoked a power for me that was most unusual for something so quiet, almost cold, essentially without the obvious emotion that is my usual playground.

The reactions individuals get from viewing art are so subjective. What one person thinks is good art is not what another person values. I have relatives for instance that think a painting is good if it looks "just like it"...like a photograph. As for authenticity of a piece, I don't come from formal training or years in the art world so it is more "art speak" to me. All I know is if I view a work and I have a reaction whether it is chills, tears, paralysis or astonishment at technique, then I have felt and viewed something authentic. The minute one tries to verbalize, describe, critique the piece, well then that moment is gone. Just as the feeling when seeing a glorious sunset. You try to describe it while viewing it and it loses it's effect. Oh well, what do I know, I am just thrilled to have this forum to learn from so many artists, even if I have to reread and sort through the words Charles uses..hehe..Love your emails Charles.

Authentic vs. Inauthentic? This work is believable. It makes me think about my own existence and place in this world. This work becomes an experience of the moment and place captured in the work itself. I feel grounded when viewing this painting. It makes a statement that is succinct and articulate. To me, that makes it Authentic.

People use words like status symbols. They let them slip through their mouths with less concern for the accuracy of the word, than the impression of what they want the word to say about them. I find that there is a pompous arrogance when people talk about art. After looking at the picture I decided that she meant 'realistic' rather than 'authentic'. But 'authentic' is a weightier word.

If all of the above talk is about the image Hesquiat Bay, I have to wonder about all the talk. That painting honours the subject and accredits it with the fidelity of the artist's observations and execution. The content of the subject is austere but the artist didn't run away from its nuances. It seems to me to be an obvious case of the artist's honesty-integrity-fidelity. That's enough to make ANY subject an art work. Beyond this, I see no genius in this work.

When I was a teenager, I read a profile of Led Zep that pointed out that their long, seemingly spontaneous jams were the products of endless hours of rehearsal. I'll never forget my shock. Rehearsal?? How boring!! How... SQUARE. After thirty-some years of being a working artist, the concept of artistic authenticity seems bemusingly paradoxical to me. There's nothing original in observing that all art is deception, illusion, a confidence trick. (Requiring a certain degree of technical accomplishment to pull it off.) Nor that art is "a lie that tells the truth"-- at least, someone's idea of the truth. But as Dylan has observed, "To live outside the law, you must be honest." (Wasn't he quoting Dillinger or somesuch?) Which means, fundamentally, being frank and candid with yourself first of all. Maybe that's the basic distinction between good art and bad art, aside from mere technical or formal competence. Bad art reeks of dishonesty. Good art bespeaks a refusal to indulge in pretension, or BS about the important stuff. It's very much like the difference between self-flattery and self-abnegation. Authenticity is the quality of an honest soul.

Authenticity to me means being the author or authority of what you present, be it yourself, an expression of art, or the dinner you cook. You create from the present moment what is before you and within, lovely challenge. The painting, to me, feels present, I recognize an aspect of self in relation to the artist's view and feel "real" in the moment, authentic.

I was watching one of the art related tv channels last night and they featured an artist and his gallery display. His art consisted of framed white canvases. It showed him painting white paint on primed canvases. Then he fussed at the maintenance people to direct the light "just right" as to show the "paintings" in a "flattering manner". Is it just me...or what is wrong with this world? Anyone can put white paint on a canvas, frame it, and (I guess) call it "ART". I just don't get it. Or....if people are paying through the nose to buy this "garbage" I have to ask "What is wrong with the buyer?" Has everybody lost their ability to see a scam?

This may be a late comment, but I was moved to add my opinion. I have carefully read everything here. I just went to an art reception which one of my pieces was in. I was lucky it sold and received great comments. Coincidentally, the exhibition is called "Less Is More" in Laguna Beach, CA and we were to place images no larger than 12X16 inches framed. I am struck by the statements made here on authenticity. I heard that word as I was listening to the winners being called out in our group show and a reason they won. The judge who was on the board of directors at the Laguna Art Museum said it was the authenticity when he talked about his reasons for picking the best in show painting. He liked how the show's winning little landscape seemed larger than life without overstating the details. He said many artists will cram too many details into such a small painting. It was then that I realized "Less Is More" had a double meaning, a small size painting which says a lot without overstating the application of strokes of paint. In Plein Air painting which I am doing right now, it is extremely important to record the scene in an arrangement of values, colors, shapes, strokes and lines very quickly and be done with it. I have a tendency to overdo the workmanship, I am guilty of that many times over. So, when an artist can get to a point that his paintings look effortless and spontaneous in production and manage to reproduce the landscape or whatever subject matter with an honest representation of the moment of light, he or she is considered a master of the art. I have had those moments once in awhile, not with every painting, I am working on it. Or should I say, I am trying not so hard to work on it and just let the painting paint itself? I think it's very possible and that time will come when all of the elements of art become balanced within my state of mind, body and soul. I have heard that oil or acrylic painting is really a series of corrections until you get it right in the end. It is nice when the corrections are few, we all would love that. Here's to succeeding in that goal for all of us in 2008 or sooner! To find my website, just Google visions2art.com