Quote: "Right now there's lots of availability and limited liquidity." I disagree. There is tons of Untitled
original painting liquidity with those that collect art, there is just a resistance to parting with it because of the perceived or real notion that the financial world situation is still in flux after the greed and stupidity of the decade. I do agree that casual buyers of art are lost for the time being, due to fear for savings and jobs and the loss of home values. The money to buy art for most is the last money they spend so all that the professional artist has lost is an audience whose focus was never on art as a first priority. I know very few that will set art above a new TV, but those that I do know set art above TV are the ones I prefer to have view and buy my works. The real core of the artist/collector dance.

The larger audience will return when economics improve, but does that mean more satisfaction for the artist who cannot help but produce art regardless of the environment of sales? I don't believe selling art was ever an end in itself or we would all be changing our styles to please the dealers and the walk-in buyers. I do agree that selling our work to anyone is a pleasure but sometimes asking why they bought it can be an unpleasant revelation.

Walter Keane did not do those paintings of "Big Eyes." He sold them as his own but his wife actually did them. He was an alcoholic and she lived a very sad and painful life as his dysfunctional partner, and therefore painting the sad pictures was her way of coping. I am a 30 year member of Al-Anon and remember her challenge to him to produce just one picture in public in the San Francisco bay area. He couldn't! Later she remarried and moved to Hawaii where she paints happy reflections of her new life free of Walter Keane's painful influence.

If you are true to your heart, it doesn't matter whether it is trendy or not. God knows the heart and the truth of the matter, and that is what is really important. The art world is so plastic and full of games and egos! You of all people know what cut-throat stuff goes on. For the human being/artist, any artistic expression is a direct communication with a higher Source. Whatever you define as Source, that Source, who created the universe, has the power to use that artistic expression to reach others when the time is right. The art I was drawn to in the 1960's is certainly not the art I am drawn to today. It is just an example of my growth and change over this lifetime. It doesn't mean I don't respect the art I was drawn to earlier in my life. I can look at it with gratitude for addressing my emotional needs at the time. I feel no need to be critical of any art because I certainly do not have the "Big Picture" Source has.

About 6 years ago, I received a little note from a woman who found me on Painter's Keys. She told me Self portrait
original painting she really liked my art work. There are hundreds of listings on the site... and I was quite flattered. She was Norma, a now 80 year old artist. We became instant friends and have been emailing each other almost every day since. She has been a mother figure and a friend and has always been my confidante. We have never met or Skyped or talked on the phone. We did everything by email or regular air mail. We made each other gifts. We belonged to a summer art group together. She has shared her stories and photos and I mine. We would encourage one another to paint. We would photograph and send each other our latest work as soon as we finished... she saw things before anyone else. She has gotten to know my friends from my stories. She recently had a birthday and I sent her a small painting I did of her mother as a little girl and she was thrilled.

The last letter I received from her was lamenting on my many losses of dear friends. Today I opened my email and first saw her familiar mail address only to find out it was written by her daughter telling me that Norma had taken a bad fall and died. I am so so sad... Even though we never met... she was one of my dearest friends. I am overwhelmed with grief over the loss.

(RG note) Thanks, Pauline. Norma Larsen lived in Australia. Her daughter Gaye Smith, also in Australia, is at smithgaye@hotmail.com.

I am taking a psychiatry class, and the subject of Mark Rothko came up. One member of my class was seemingly really thrilled with Mr. Rothko's work. I only saw shapes and colors, while my classmate kept talking about much deeper, almost "religious" feelings from Mr. Rothko's art. Are you able to refer me to a book, or an Internet site where Rothko's work is explained in more detail?

(RG note) Thanks, Hank. The best insight into Rothko's mind that I know of is The Artist's Reality; Philosophies of Art , by Mark Rothko; Edited and with an introduction by Christopher Rothko. Probably written around 1940, it shows Rothko's ideas on the modern art world, art history, myth, beauty, the challenges of being an artist in society and what he felt was the true nature of American art. Christopher Rothko, the artist's son, describes his father and the discovery of the manuscript and the fascinating process of bringing it to publication. It's illustrated with a small selection of relevant examples of the artist's own work as well as with reproductions of pages from the actual manuscript.

Another book, The Legacy of Mark Rothko by Lee Seldes gives insight into Rothko's checkered life, his death by suicide and, more than anything, what happens to a careless artist's estate when it's not managed properly.

I'm curious in knowing what lighting you use in your studio. I am re-thinking my studio lighting Enough
acrylic painting and would appreciate your comments.

(RG note) Thanks, Lori. I've loaded up with Compact Fluorescent Lights (CFL). Those are the curly ones that screw into normal sockets. I use the ones on the cool side. I like them because they are supposed to last longer and use about 75% less energy. On the other hand, some research finds that their "electronic fields" can cause migraines and skin rashes, etc, etc. Even though I am a well known and much discussed hypochondriac in some circles, so far I have not been bothered that I'm aware of. I'd appreciate hearing anything readers might have to say about this. Right now I have principles, but they can be changed. Just today I learned that a far greater threat to global warming is not automobile emissions but bovine flatulence.

I know a few artists who swear by Ott Lights. They are of excellent design, equate the colour temperature of daylight, and not so expensive if you limit yourself to just one at your easel.

I am in the process of divorcing after 20 plus years of marriage and would like to go back to Soaring
acrylic painting
30 x 30 inches using my maiden name which I much prefer. It would be Andrea Scott-Pearse However I have been successfully painting and selling since 2006 and have my married name as my website . What to do, as I see disadvantages particularly since I have been signing my paintings using my married name.

(RG note) Thanks, Andrea. This is a most significant problem, particularly for women who wish to cut all ties with a previous relationship. Children (if any) should be consulted or at least told your plans. As we all know, there's value in the continuity of a name. But in some cases a change of name can be a talking point—before and after sort of thing—and folks can try to figure out whether the really good stuff came after. Gives dealers something to talk about. It's a lot of trouble, changing domains, emails, etc, but it's doable. In your case, and with your classy maiden name, I'd say go for it.

Again, I am at odds with my art group. The conflict revolves around contests for kids involved Untitled
mixed media in art. Recently I turned down an opportunity to judge a group of kids from kindergarten to fourth grade. The guidelines were very stringent and the contest was to be judged with a 1st, 2nd etc. ranking. I believe that kids need the experience of art without the rating system. They don't need to be judged for what they do, even though it might seem inferior to others. This, to me is the quickest way to stifle the interest in art. There is a winner and a loser and the loser just might believe they don't have what it takes to do art. At that point they may never attempt to express themselves in a creative way. Too much of our society is based upon competition as the sole reason for attempting anything. It is as if everything needs to be in a box, categorized, numbered and judged for quality. Many in my group expressed the opinion that that is life - win or lose. That might be life but to defeat one at such a young age is cruel. I believe in the quotation of Albert Einstein, "I believe in standards for cars but not people."

(RG Note) Thanks, Tom. I'm of the opinion that we are giving far too many awards these days. I've juried competitions where we jurors were required to turn just about everybody into a winner. This generosity has the effect of lowering standards, even with kids. Kids need to be shown that you don't get stars for just trying or just showing up. You get them for excelling. The price of over-rewarding is mediocrity.

Some of my collages are more conceptual than others. The pictures were printed at Kinko's on 32 Bird house
collage lb paper. The white is very white and the paper seems to have held the glue well. What I still haven't quite figured out (and to be honest I need to do some experimenting) is how to preserve the work. What can I do to cover all of the surfaces? Water based seems to wrinkle the paper and other media may yellow over time. Do you have any thoughts that would help?

(RG note) Thanks, Ken. Gloss 32 lb photocopy paper is not archival, but will stay bright white for a decade if kept in a dark place. I've had a bit of luck with a light spray of Krylon Crystal Clear Acrylic coating 41303 on both sides. If overdone, the spray can give photocopies a sort of film-grain effect, which may or may not be desirable. A heavier, archival support would be a good place to start.