You've done it again - answered me almost before I had formed the question. It's 6:30 am in Rome and I have heaved myself out of bed to write a piece on art that is just bugging me to be said. And here I find your post on story. My very thoughts were on the allegorical paintings that so define the history of Christianity and how they relate to our need to find meaning in our art today and what our contemporary art says about our cultural choices. It's a big think and one that has perplexed me for many years as I've tried to penetrate and understand the art world as a self defined 'art liaison'.

We trekked miles yesterday as I showed my sweetheart all the spots that claimed my devotion to Rome from my first encounter a couple of years ago. Ionically, in this city of art, we looked at no paintings. Instead I rhapsodized over the colours and shapes of the buildings as glimpsed down a curving narrow street; over the imagined echo of leather sandals slapping the dark uneven cobble stones and the flinty clop of horses hooves, and how the reverence for antiquity and the passion for modernism are harmonized here in Italy by the sheer love of beauty.

I see the fresh paintings of street vendors in the Piazza Navona and, while accurate in their way, they lack any kind of resonance with my felt truth of this eternal city. I am reminded how important the artist's story is to me of any works I own or adore. I love the wonderful and implausible – the many shades its takes to make a dark shadow – as you described in The Painter's Keys (which I have brought with me). This sort of subtlety captures what my heart feels but a camera just can't get. I rely on the artist's 'seeing' the story within colour and light and shape that tells me I really am living a numinous life. And like the ending in "Life of Pi" – it really is all about choice – isn't it?

Rome is indeed marvellous, but "any felt truth" has to include the shadows i.e. knowledge that much of the beauty and elegance of historical art owes its existence to evil. Not just the allegories in the paintings, but the faces of high and mighty who - anxious to be redeemed when the time came - paid large sums of money to be depicted. The church was a political power, dispensing judgment and punishment in the glory days of Rome, and redemption if you paid enough for it. The common folk feared reprisals if they didn't conform. There was a continuous power struggle. All that is in those paintings that now hang there so elegantly, not to mention the objets d'art of gold, silver and precious stones come by through theft, murder etc.. The subject matter was certainly appropriate for decorating religious building - after all, the nabobs financed it all, so why shouldn't they be the heroes and heroines (and their enemies and the humble the evil characters?)?
It is simply amazing how much wealth and beauty the "Church of Rome" amassed through the centuries and of course it is wonderful to look at it. We can be thankful that the power and greed of the religious and poitical establishments left such a spectacular legacy. But a dark shadow hangs over the past. The art and architecture celebrates the rich and powerful who had blood on their hands. Most Italians, though proud of their heritage, have no time for sheer wonderment. They leave the sentimentality to the tourists.
To resonate with the letter today requires a leap of faith...
Everyone loves a good story, but is not usually happy if the last pages of their book have been ripped out and the end remains a mystery.
If a modern painting is not explicit about what it is about, and the title gives no clues, then we can make a story up. We do that all the time, not just when looking at paintings. But I think it's part of the sport of modern painting, just as looking at the faces on those religious works demands some kind of response. Real or abstract, most painting requires the cooperation of the viewer. Until it is brought to life by being appreciated (or condemned) it is merely colours and shapes/objects on a prepared surface). Those splodges on modern paintings might just be splodges, accidental sweeps of the brush or some other tool, or deliberate constructions, protests, statements etc.. If we are not told, we find our own solutions.
I'm reminded of a friend who painted the Pyramids of Gizeh from a photo (she had never been to Egypt). In the photo there was an empty space of sky between the sphinx and the next pyramid. That really bothered my friend so she simply painted another pyramid to fill in the space. That was fine till a friend looked at it who had been to Gizeh. "What's that pyramid doing there?" she wanted to know. "There is no pyramid on that spot." "Well, there should be", was my friend's reaction. I can't look at that painting without thinking of that story....

I am a self taught artist, never been to a single teacher (my biggest regret) due to my circumstances and all I have learnt is through reading and more reading.I am always drawn towards telling a story through my art. Most of my works sold only because the buyer related to the story conveyed and not because they were great works. Recently I was turned down by a local gallery because my work lacked technique. The same work got sold in a private exhibition because the buyer appreciated the story and did not know about any techniques that made the art. Honestly, I feel that by concentrating on the story aspect I am not able to learn more of techniques, I am almost trivializing my art. The process is as important as the story, balancing of both is the need of the hour for me, thank you for this post.

Story is an aspect of painting or photography, just like line or value. If some art movements choose to minimize it, well, so be it. It's up to the artist to choose whether she will deliberately put in story elements, and a lot depends on the market you are trying to reach.
Too much story, every single element depicted, can make a painting trite or boring-the story becomes more important than the painting. One exception to this is illustration, because the picture is meant to be secondary to the story and enhance it.
I like to include some story elements, and leave it up to the viewer to "fill in the blanks". The viewer's imagination is a very powerful thing, and by leaving room for that, you can increase the impact of your painting.

Robert, what a provocative assessment of the evolution of painting philosophy and motivation. Thank you. I instinctively see story in my subjects and in fact, even though by realist renderings are obvious, I write a story synopsis that expresses what I as the artist have seen, and I place that on the back of a finished painting.

This is a wonderful topic and deserves more than one letter. I think that if there is no story, people will make one up. I grew up as an involuntarily transient, and when I returned to a place, I learned all sorts of stories about why I left, none true. People are desperate for explanations and will provide them if none are given. There is plenty of story in Rothko's work, even if there are no obvious protagonists. Lately I have been painting "relationships" using small Native American Sculptures. Friends are responding to them with a sense of recognition.

I was very taken with your letter as it pushed me to answer the questions I have not been able to. What is the story I am trying to tell? I'm fascinated by color and light and shadows. Nature puts it all in front of us. As a psychiatrist I am saying, 'really look at what truth (light) reveals', as a Christian I am saying, 'God created nature, all of it, and in the allegory of light and shadows and colors lies all of good and evil and in between. And the Light reveals all. As an artist I am saying that the play of light through scenes is fascinating in what it reveals, the joy of intense light and color, and what it doesn't reveal...that which we must struggle to come to terms with artistically, technically and emotionally.

Thank you for your very stimulating article. You asked the question I couldn't form and the answers rushed at me as if awaiting only their release.
Jeanie Zaimes

To be able to look at a piece of art and not make up a story about it is pretty challenging. Even a white canvas, unpainted, will have me telling a story of some kind about "the painting that isn't." I find art more engaging if it leaves some room for the viewer to be able to participate in the telling of their own story. I want my paintings to invite story in the viewer rather than dictate story to them. It makes finding a title for a painting tough at times!

Stories are very important to me in my painting practice, not illustrating already existing stories, but evolving paintings that enable viewers to provide their own stories. For me, it works best to begin making marks on the canvas, then see what those initial marks remind me of; a dream, a memory, some action or interaction between people.

Twyla Tharp, in her book The Creative Habit (which I learned about from you in the Twice-Weekly Letters, I believe) divides story-tellers from non-story tellers by the words zoe and bios. She says that the choreographer George Balanchine was pure zoe: his ballets were about life-force alone, with a less definable structure. Another choreographer, Jerome Robbins, was exactly the opposite: his dances were about the story, pure bios. She makes this distinction in her book to help artists understand how they are wired, some wired more to life-force (zoe) and others more to telling a story (bios), or, if you like both, understand you are going to have your creative impulses warring with each other.

I think about this often in my own work and once, when helping a friend illustrate a children's book about adoption with a particularly emotional passage , she emphasized that one should not be too overt in using images to tell the story because the emotion conveyed can be too raw for children. I think allowing both children and adults to find their own story, even in a narrative-style piece of art, is perhaps where the "sweet" spot is.

In my landscape and seascape paintings the story is primarily simply the beauty found in creation. If I add people and/or animals, then more of a story may be told.

In several of my still life paintings, I deliberately try to tell a story with various props representing and symbolizing a "hidden" or not so hidden meaning. At times I might explain the symbolism; other times I let the viewers use their imagination to grasp the story represented in my work. "Less is more" is usually the best procedure when it comes to endeavoring to explain your painting; the viewer and collector needs to find meaning in your work to satisfy his own soul and to speak to him personally.

I like Jim's post. I agree that every canvas is a story. Even the non-story examples that Bob gave, have a story behind them consisting of the artist's life experiences, and of stories triggered in the viewers minds. I am happiest with many "paintings that aren't" waiting for their turn on the easel.

Before technology, stories were told or drawn, sculpted or crafted. We have so many story telling vehicles now. Is art now liberated or orphaned? Is it a child or master? Can we make it be what we want, or will it determine what it will become? Nobody can mess with a Bengal Tiger so that’s what we all want to be on a castaway raft. But what about all the zebras and orangutans of the world, and not mention the meerkats?

One cannot neglect to mention the part story paintings played in the proliferation of Christianity during the Middle Ages and beyond. For the ignorant and illiterate, the paintings were perhaps the only paintings they saw, and were indeed wonderful and miraculous. While they were not often able to understand the Latin texts or sermons, they were awestruck and learned visually the stories that turned them into believers.

"Life of Pi" is even more remarkable when you realize that in the three-D movie the unbelievably realistic animals were animated. This is Art.

Artists in film have little choice but to bow to the story line. Some might say this is not art but illustration, but then was Norman Rockwell the great story teller of Americana an artist? I think so. Perhaps "No story, or a story so obscure it might never be fathomed, was the best story of all.' is the correct mantra but alas in film we are deprived of that luxury. Once again a wonderful article. Keep up the good work. Here is a film illustration for a Edgar Rice Burroughs future world fantasy called Black Hawk based on his book Moon Men.

Do you mean that we "love" Van Gogh because we know of his story through the movie: Lust for Life? First, that movie was not really based on fact. It was "Hollywood". He was NOT crazy. He had epilepsy.

Are you implying that Van Gogh paintings would not stand up today completely on their own as works of art without this story?

As for modern artists: Some of them create stories and artistic personalities so that their work will sell / be accepted. Is this valid? DeKooning is a master. Does knowing he was an alcoholic help in understand his beautiful vibrant brushwork and color because it provides a story? I certainly hope not.

I think today we have finally learned to look at representational works without paying attention to the stories, to look at them with eyes knowledgeable to the formal elements, and see that they can often be as "modern" as modern art which does not need a story. A flower is an excuse to paint color, etc.

A new pope who is humble, takes the bus, loves the poor, doesn't bother with all the robes and riches--is a good story, but it doesn't go far in women's rights and the potential of women within the organization, can't fix the internal corruption, who doesn't speak out vigorously during his own country's dirty war, gives little inclusion to gays and lesbians, and is part of the universal coverup of child abuse is from nowhere. We'll see. "A pope is a man whose ring is kissed and whose feet are tied."

Robert: I once heard that the definition of poetry is "that which can not be translated". Seems to me that is a good goal for any art. In other words the story can not be completed in another form.

Marie: I am a humanist and I'm bound to correct you on one or two points. Before I do so I should point out that a good story is a good story wherever it occurs and whatever evil or good it portraits (start with fairytales if you want a taste of good conquering evil!).Firstly, it is impossible to judge what this Bishop of Rome will do with his pontificate on the basis of demonstrative humility on his first day in the position. It's how he has comported himself all his working life and there is no reason to think he is putting on an act (if he is, he chould be on the big screen). Secondly, his choices so far have been aimed against the demonstration of wealth and vanity that are evidently rife among the high and mighty in the RC church and are financed by believers of all stations in life. this is not to say that all those cardinals wanted to wear those silly red hats and tailor-made robes, with rings on their fingers (and bells on their toes?)but they do! Thirdly, no one person can fix evil or injustice, but it is possible for one person to set an example especially within an institution that claims to have a membership of every 8th person on this globe. Where there's life, there's hope. I only have to read about this new pope rejecting the customary red shoes (Gucci perhaps?) and wearing his own black ones for that first inaugural ceremony to realise how meaningless, superficial traditions have achieved importance, at least in the Vatican.
There is a very good adage that fits many situations: If you don't try, you have already failed. In a public position such as the pope has taken on, that will certainly be part of his way of doing things. We do not know if he can change things for the better. As long as there people willing to give power or leave it to despots and criminals, or to profit from it, anyone trying to preach good by demonstratively rejecting evil - which so often emanates from vanity, the ability to manipulate (charm?) people and a feeling of omnipotence (and you don't have to be pope to do that) should be given a chance and not rejected out of hand.
It might be worth remembering that at least 25% of the abuse of children and women (and occasionally men) takes place in the home. It is also true that people in responsible positions (including bishops, priests, school directors, hospital staff and even parents) have historically turned a blind eye to abuse and still continue to do so.

It is likely that I have many miles to put on my brushes before I can call myself an 'artist', because unlike so many I do not ask myself questions prior to beginning a work. I do not ask, "What would you like to communicate today?", or "What story would you like to tell today?", or "What say we create a painting 'without' a story today?", or "Do I have anything relevant to SAY today?" So many artists with whom I'm familiar profess to 'communicate' with others, but I confess to a gnawing feeling of inadequacy, a cavity inside me where meaningful intent does not presently live. I sometimes wish I had a social agenda which guided my work to chide or expose or guide; perhaps an innate madness would be better to guide my hand than the contentment which causes me to mix my paints and to make my 'happy accidents', a phrase thoughtfully used by a teaching artist to allay the fears and resistances of his students. Perhaps I need to work several sets of brushes down to stiff nubs before it is revealed to me the conversation I am supposed to be having. One artist won't hang his own paintings in his own home because he considers his art a communication with others and he doesn't like talking to himself! I am still in love with many of my paintings, and I enjoy their short time within my home. Some I paint to live here permanently. If I am speaking with my paintings, I am deaf to what they are saying. I love the stories of Rockwell. I applaud the newly discovered dismissal of meaning Rothko declared. Recently I have been exposed to concepts relating to the origins of cognition, and I believe that art is as wonderful in its own way without the abstraction of linquistics as our enjoyment and contentment while staring into a campfire or peering deeply into the Milky Way.

I also meant to comment on how glad I am to find others who view some of our generally recognized 'greatest' works of mankind with the balance of the knowledge of what toll that work entailed. I can rarely view the 'grandeur' of the antebellum mansions of the American South without saying to myself, "ANYone could have done this with the forced labor of slavery." The pyramids have stood for centuries as one of several Manmade Wonders of the World, and yet I do not think of the glories of Egypt but instead think, "I could have also have done that if I were considered a God by my people, and if I had enough military victories to bring an enormous supply of slaves to work my projects against their will." Have you ever seen the opulence of some churches? I have, and it is startling. Is this art communicating a tribute to God, or would God want that art to be sold to make a huge impact on the lives of the poor? (Not that I have an insight into the mind of God, much less my own) For now, then, I will continue to create paintings that seem to me to be beautiful, in hopes that I am able to communicate this beauty for others experience. Perhaps that is my story, but it feels more like a poem.

Talk about stories. Seeing we are on to the RC church, the official story is that birth control, except by ineffective means, is against God's will. And yet over 90% of Catholic American women of childbearing age are using it. If the new pope is so interested in poverty, then surely he might see fit to relieve some of it by permitting contraception in Latin America and Africa where large numbers of children destabilize families and set the stage for more and more poverty. It seems the church would like the poverty to continue so the priests have something to anguish about. American Catholic women are speaking. Are the red-beanie guys listening?

re: John DeCuir...your comment made me realize that there are no abstract movies! (excepting Stan Brackhage and some other non-narrative film experimenters in the 60's, like Kenny Schneider)

I recently had a knowledgable friend ask me, "Do you think you've found your voice as a painter?"
Well, no ... the story may not necessarily be in the work itself but in us. If we found our "voice" after a decade or two and said everything there was to say we would never pick up a brush again. It is a never ending struggle to communicate, to master a medium that eludes the most skilled. Trying to make sense of this world at times is truly baffling ... but we still try through our art.

A painting that has a story behind poses a challenge to the viewer and will generate more interest in the painting. Also, the colors used to indicate mood or atmosphere in the painting will enhance the story behind the painting.

Don't forget the "Conversation piece." Originally it was an informal group portrait, especially from the 18th century. Groups were engaged in genteel conversation or some activity, thus one might wonder what they were talking about: family business, hunt club business, love, friendships, etc. These paintings offered bundles of story and were therefore talked about by others.

Paintings or other art should always cause people to think. Pretty pictures are not enough any more.

I'm not sure how the analogy/metaphor that "seriously, we're all in a lifeboat with a Bengal Tiger" applies to knowing 'your' story or the story of a particular painting, because in the movie the Bengal Tiger represented one aspect of the total makeup of Pi, that aspect which was able to kill another, and other life forms, to survive. it was an aspect that was repugnant and horrible to him, yet it lived within him. Perhaps this is simply a weak analogy that you have chosen to use, because even though each person may have some interior aspects that lie hidden, not each of these will be the wild animal that operates from instinct willing to kill as part of its nature. Artists, in my opinion, represent a part of the human community who, instead of manifesting the rightfully repressed destructive survival instinct of their evolutionary distant past, generally express a more spiritual, civilized, creative play with beauty, empathy, and communication. In this respect, I believe it would be closer to the mark to say that we are all in a lifeboat with a canary in a cage with no door.

Some tigers are pussycats

I always like to have a story for my art and I have a poetess cousin who will write me a poem to do a picture with or she will write a poem that inspires me. At the moment we are exploring Titian together. I have been collecting the little dogs in his immense pictures and doing a picture of them all lying on a yellow satin blanket or barking at a strange bird creature. Since I was a child I have been collecting pictures that illustrate a poem and have still got the scrapbook I made as a young girl. I have been looking up Paul Durcan the Irish poet. He loves to write poems about pictures and his book "Give Me Your Hand" is inspired by pictures in the National Gallery.

I've often thought that the word 'story' is too much of a word for most art. Unless a painting is crammed with stuff it cannot tell a whole story, just part of it. Much the same way that artists use the word 'drama'. I've heard on a number of occasions where a splash of red adds drama to a work, when it reality it adds a point of interest. Drama's and stories are for books. Feeling, atmosphere, joy and such like are for paintings. Stories are about people, a landscape devoid of human activity or signs of human activity cannot tell a story.

Ah Robert, You've mixed art and religion ... as expected some of the topics have steered off art onto political territory. Look at how you're intentions have gone astray - just like art. You probably weren't thinking about birth control in developing countries were you? This is a result of our flawed human perception making up stories or personalizing a reality so that it fits our agenda or premise. You can't control people's reactions or stories. The best you can do it to tell the truth.

The premise of the Life of Pi, that we are given the choice of two stories. One story is believable and quite predictable, the other implausible and wonderful. was just another story. It is only a PERSONAL matter of choice. There are facts. Most likely the cold hard reality described in the end story was the true report of the occurences. People tend to confuse opinions with facts. We have a right to our opinion, but not our opinion about the facts. Imagine a rapist telling the Life of Pi version to the police. Some versions of story are delusional.

Art is not in the same league as one's opinion over the existence of God or not- There are lots of opinions about the facts. Why do you think so many people believe the Genesis version over Evolution? Why are there so many different religious books? Art is in itself an illusion and therefore inherently not real. The truth of art without story is not a Rothko or abstraction. It is story itself. The truth sounds more like various chemicals, applied with various materials through electrical brain impulses... Not as poetic as the first person's story that posted here. Most people run from this reality.

So here's my point, paint your heart out. Say what you want, be it a concept about the play of light and shadow or one form in relationship to another. Make your painting about a summer's day boating event. Just know that someone will come along and start talking about how all this relates to the Pope or inequities of social economic status between the races. People make up shit(stories) and it most likely means nothing anyway or has anything to do with your intention. Paint with passion. Study our craft. Be true to your own intention because everyone else has their own agenda.

Quite short but very insightful article. The wordle given in the 'esoterica' is very useful for the artist-in-process like me who, just enjoys to paint on weekends, to develop myself and start to define my works and gradually evolve.

I have recently been exploring and trying to understand what the stories are in my own work. For me, it is a challenge to maintain the delicate balance between not painting trite overly romanticized subjects, and letting someone in on some situation or subject they might have not ordinarily been aware of. Trying to avoid syrupy subjects and still tell a story is more difficult than it seems. Thanks for the thought provoking article.

Love the article. I think we are drawn to each of those art stories; to help us visualize some of the history we learn in books, to test our intuition, to wonder at the extents of human imagination, to puzzle over artist intention and to connect abstract ideas.

I got a chuckle out of your the paragraph on the Non-Story. It was reminiscent of Todd Snider’s song: "Talkin’ Seattle Grunge Rock Blues - the story of a band who made it to the top by refusing to play." In the end they were knocked off the charts by a band that wasn't even together – the band that never showed up.

Thank you for your artful insight.

This April Leo horoscope I received this morning from http://carlboudreau.blogspot.com made me laugh- guess I'll have to tell some more stories...

♌ LEO ~ (July 22 - Aug. 21) Leo’s prefer bright, warm venues, cheery story lines and receptive audiences. But April brings moody lighting, tough lines, and a nervous audience with short attention spans. You’ll need to deliver lines about people being much more honest with themselves, and about taking more responsibility. People need to hear this message now and it will benefit them a great deal. Be attentive to financial issues. Overly complex financial deals leave room for mischief - and loss. Simple and clear terms are best. Friends are unusually supportive.

The way this letter turned out religious responses regarding Christianity and a new pope ignored the other story so prominent over the last few weeks.

You know- Susan Sandburg being interviewed on 60 minutes. Lean in- ladies! Condoleeza Rice, Leslie Stahll and a woman from the Obama administration being interviewed on CBS This Morning. You need to stop thinking everybody has to be nice and be more worried about taking your career seriously. The woman who made it to CFO of Lehman Bros just before it imploded- interviewed Friday night on Rock Center- then bailed and now is saying that if you want to pursue a career-great- but if you want a wonderful family- well- that's ok too!

I don't personally agree with her- but oh well.

And the statistics- over the last 30 years more women than men have graduated from college... but if you look at who's running the Fortune 500 companies- only 4 percent are female!

So I get that women have taken over education and much of healthcare- both empathic employment structures- and many are pursuing creative careers- but really- only 4 percent of CEOs at the top in business are women?

And politics- more women than ever before in the US government- but still way too few? You change it by joining it- not by avoiding it.

Having a nice family is not a career choice. Living longer means we have to have both family options and career options. And holding onto gender stereotyped perceptions of reality- both female and male- get us nowhere.

So if you're bored with me- you don't want to face the truth.

The only reason I'm pointing it all out is because I got bored with the heterosexist culture I grew up in- oh- 40 years ago- and with the female bull 20 years ago. And 15 years ago- the governor that kept me biting my tongue just blew up and ever since-my tongue's been so much better.

Everyone has a story, their story, and it's worth hearing, and learning from.

Stories are stories, even if they're hooey. I'm talkin' 'bout Mormons here.

The main thing in telling a story is to to give some information, present a problem, and then keep the viewer/reader waiting as long as possible for the answer to be divulged. This is why it's good to make the story a little less than obvious. An obvious story in a painting turns it into kitch. Nothing like a touch of mystery.

Talking about Mormons, because the historical stories are so far fetched, the average Mormon must endure a fair amount of intellectual dishonesty to stay within the organization, regardless of the reported good the outfit does. Which might just be one of the reasons why Mitt Romney was defeated.

Fantastic addition to the site (Bob's Best) and the color theory DVD is superb.

Hi Robert;
As I teenage I was enchanted with a movie that centered around a painting. The scene was that of an English countryside. Eventually the viewer entered the painting and walked down the rambling pathway.
I have always doodled or painted but when i married in 1968 I began to paint seriously and also to my delight, made sales. One of my clients brought back a painting. She was disappointed because I had not included the story about the painting. When she was in my gallery viewing my work, she bought this particular painting because of the story. She wanted the story typed out and affixed to the back dust cover. She wanted to relate this story to her guests.
Ever since then all my paintings, prints and pen & inks have their own story. I know this isn't the same kind of story as you are talking about but today people want to be emmotionally connected to the art work otherwise it is like wallpaper. Just an image with no life or soul. I deeply admire your work and that of Quiller. Although I have been painting professionally for over forty-five years I feel I am not satisfied one hundred percent with my artistic skills. I aspire to be more like some of the great artists I so admire but I have also learned that I am not them, I am unique and have my own purpose and skills. Hubby hasn't updated the website with my latest work as he has been very busy but you can see my renderings and read my stories at www.jennyphillipsdutton.ca
Carry on the good work you do Robert. I live in a rural community and am fairly isolated from other artists. You help me feel connected.
Thanks
Jenny Phillips

One day in my elementary art class I learned one of my most important lessons on meaning in art. The painting unit we were on was paired up with a social studies unit on "the farm". I had posted many photos of farm buildings, equipment, and animals for the kids to see and work from. The kids were primed with information from both of us teachers and ready to paint their farm scene. 40 minutes into the painting session as I made the rounds I came across one boy's painting that dumbfounded me. It was a solid red surface. When I asked him to tell me about his picture he stated "This is my picture of a farm. There's a cow eating some hay and a bunch of chickens, but you can't see them because they're on the other side of this big barn." I was so stunned at his interpretation! As a result I mounted every students' painting on a larger white backing and had them each tell me their story which I hand printed all around the four sides of the painting. I hung the red painting in the most advantageous place for viewers to read. I can't tell you what great chuckles that painting and it's story got. I hope his parents framed it! I never doubted the interpretation from another student again.

My work always has story whether subliminal or obvious or even unintentional. I also believe the likes of Rothko, Pollack and Still's et al, have story in their works though they testify there is none. To create is to say something about either the process of art or the life of the artist regardless of the paintings visual content. I think it impossible to create a work of art without revealing some inner truth, idea or subtext about the creator. Everyone who makes a mark on paper or canvas or whatever, makes a statement about themselves however obscure the meaning to the viewer.
Even works where there is obvious scorn for art say something about the artist who made it. A child making mudpies is speaking through his inadequacies, his unconscious mind and his desire to be heard and seen.
Artists through history like to think they are being revolutionary in making obscure or obtuse creations hoping to set the art world abuzz and make a name for themselves, but if you look back and see their works in context with the times, they are speaking volumes. Those with no voice are not remembered.

p.s. One added thing. I also believe that an artist isn't obligated to tell or inform anyone about the meaning behind his/her work. I have found when I don't tell anyone the meaning, they assign their own meaning, which becomes more personal to them.

Oh, Bruce, I'm glad your tongue's been so much better! You make me laugh out loud!! Boring?
Hope things keep getting better for you....

Every picture tells a story.

Paintings are like pages in a book of the artists life, a journal of their loves, passions and truths, lovingly recorded.
When an artist creates a series of paintings each one is a chapter in something that has so deeply inspired them
That one painting can't tell the whole story. That is how it is for me. I believe that even abstract works express
And tell their own story, even if we all can't read them. The elements of a painting are not always what they might seem.
Symbols used in painting are well known and much has been written about deciphering them but I believe the artist's
Deepest feelings always remain a mystery. Like the Mona Lisa's smile, the enigma for me is not why she is smiling
Like she is but what was Leonardo thinking and feeling.
It is this enigma along with beauty that keeps one engaged with looking at a painting. A good work of art is one that
You never tire of looking at and a great one is one that you continue to discover new nuances every time you view it.
The story keeps unfolding, your first impression might change but you are still drawn to the beauty and the enigma.
It has been said that details and portions of a work should be left undone to create a space for the viewer to finish,
To create interest, but some stories need to be told in full if for no other reason than to satisfy the artist's desire to see
The mystery of their story.

I painted a bouquet which was in a show. A woman came in and admired it greatly and had decided to buy it.
Bad story: To enhance the work I told the story of painting it for my mother which is why it was called Mother's Day. She looked at me in horror before walking off. "I always hated my mother." She said.

It took three years to tell this story. I took the photos of my mother's hands about a week before she died. She was an artist herself, excelling in the very difficult medium of china painting. In the last year of her life she usually had a band-aid on her middle finger because of a nail that kept splitting. It wasn't until this spring that I was able to finish the piece.

I always like to have a story for my art and I have a poetess cousin who will write me a poem to do a picture with or she will write a poem that inspires me. At the moment we are exploring Titian together. I have been collecting the little dogs in his immense pictures and doing a picture of them all lying on a yellow satin blanket or barking at a strange bird creature. Since I was a child I have been collecting pictures that illustrate a poem and have still got the scrapbook I made as a young girl.
I have been looking up Paul Durcan, the Irish poet. He loves to write poems about pictures and his book Give me your hand is inspired by pictures in the National Gallery.

Gosh- I made somebody laugh??? (Finally.)

I forgot that other story- the interview of Gloria Steinem by Charlie Rose on PBS... (Did I get her name right?)

He asked her how the feminist movement was going and she said- paraphrased- that well- it looked like it was going along fine and then something called the religious right rose up- and then became the moral majority- and we still don't have an equal rights amendment!

Why?

Because there is still a large group of both men AND WOMEN who are holding on to religious-based gender limitations and gender roles. Sad. Really.

More women on CBS This Morning- this morning- about leaning out of the workplace. Out of careers and back into homeville. At least until they get beyond child-raising- and then they'll be stuck- with no center- trying to figure out what to do with the rest of their lives.

And always note- I use my name because I WANT you to know who said what I said...

By the way Guido- I was born and raised a Mormon...

Somebody's sure to say- oh that's why he's such a....

I have mixed feelings about Van Gogh’s self-portrait. I believe there is a likeness, even though the nose, ear, etc., are not correct, according to the photo. His right eye does look like the one in the painting. The other is different. Do you suppose that these changes were really how he looked after the sad life he lived and the disappointments he endured?
Claire Hall, GWS, TaWS, Valdosta, GA