Name This Painting!
Today is the last day for entries in this year’s Name This Painting! Contest. The competition ends at midnight tonight and I’ll be announcing the winner within the next day or two. It may take me a while to choose between some of these titles.
There have been some pretty evocative titles that give me real pause. Some even disturb me a bit. It’s just interesting to see how others perceive a painting, to see what they are reading in the work. I am sometimes startled at how different some of these perceptions are from my own. Startled but not surprised. It’s obvious that we all interpret things we see or hear in different ways. If not, we would all see things the same way and draw the same conclusions, leaving us with a consensus in everything we did. This is certainly not the case in anything we attempt as a people.
Art is no different. I think I may have told of an encounter at an opening where a viewer stood before a painting of mine of two intertwined trees. To me, it was about the dependency of the two trees on one another, about how they became one entity, gathering strength from each other. This person saw it in a completely different light. In their eyes, it was about domination and subjugation, about violence. This person was quite disturbed by the painting and I was left standing there, looking at the piece, wondering if it had somehow exposed some hidden corner of my personal psychology that I didn’t realize I was uncovering. I felt like I was being accused by this person of being a dominator. A bully. A rapist.
I realized quickly, after taking a quick inventory of myself, that this interpretation was more about this person’s psychology, about their own personal agenda, than mine. I felt better but the episode lingered with me. This person’s reading of and reaction to a painting that, to most, would be anything but controversial seemd so out of step with its intent. It made me better understand how difficult it is to put anything out in the world without creating some adverse reaction to some extent. As an artist, you hope to create something that translates in a universal manner but it’s a rare event given the way we all see things through lenses tinted with our own personal biases. But I just keep trying.
So give this painting a look and give me a look at how your mind works by submitting a title……..
Redtree Times 
One Last Entry for me:
“Afterglow”, I see the fallen chair as the loss of a companian, and the path as a new directon or journey. I also think that the latin title will be tough to beat.
Here’s what’s fascinated me about this.
Even apart from the contest, I often title your paintings in my mind. The titles never, ever change. Sometimes it takes a while for the title to come, but when it does, it just is.
With my essays, it’s different. The title may change four or five times through the writing. Sometimes it’s only a word or two, but changes do occur. It’s like fitting the title to the piece.
On the other hand, I have several titles in my files with nothing to go with them! In that case, the process of writing is like “unpacking” the title, figuring out what I mean by it.
I suspect it’s the difference between naming a finished piece and watching a title emerge through the process of actual creation. In any event, it’s very, very interesting.
Hello from Alicja in sunny Tucson,
It is very interesting what you wrote today. I believe that most of us see Art (in any form) through the prism of our experiences in life and our sensitivity & responses to the world around us.
Concerning this painting, I can’t help to see some sadness in it. You might have totally different feelings while painting it, but that is what I see and feel. Perhaps I feel that way, because my attention goes mostly to the second chair, the one behind. The front chair represents for me strength, pride, and victory. It is something sad about that second chair and I would like to title this painting “LEFT BEHIND”. I still like my first title “BROKEN BONDS”.
Have fun with so many choices!
With best wishes,
Alicja
“Titles have never given a just idea of things; were it otherwise, the work would be superfluous.” – Gustave Courbet
Courbet was absolutely correct. While they can convey the gist of an idea, they can never express the true scope and depth of the work itself.