Another thing from the Out of Bounds interview that I wanted to expand on was my answer to Tish Pearlman‘s question as to what advice I might give to aspiring artists. I said that I thought that they should paint the paintings that they wanted to see. I think there needs to be a little more depth to that answer.
Earlier in the interview I had said that I was influenced by a wide variety of imagery from other great painters and illustrators to advertising and film and television. Any visual input had some influence. I spoke of deeply saturated colors that I had seen maybe 25 years ago in a Coke ad on TV, colors that still dwell in my mind. There are hundreds of little nudges that push at the buttons for the perfect, idealized image that you maintain in your mind but is never quite fully captured. I know that’s how it was for me.
I would go into museums and look at great works of art and absolutely love so many of them yet still felt that none was exactly an expression of what I was feeling or who I was. There was always a lingering feeling that there was work that was closer to the hazy criteria my mind presented, work that I still wasn’t seeing. It was this feeling that led me to the conclusion that I would never find what I was looking for by trying to paint in the style of other painters. If their work was what I was looking for to begin with, why even paint? It seemed to me that too many artists are satisfied by simply doing work that resembles other work, safe in the accepted pack, rather that taking the gamble on stepping away from it.
But I wanted to step away and to do so I would have to assess what I was as well as what I wasn’t. By that, I mean I would play to what I felt were my strengths and not waste too much energy on my weaknesses. I knew that anything that would be close to what I wanted to see had to come from a total belief from within and that trying to do things that were not who I was, which would be a weak area in my abilities, would diminish the whole thing. No, it needed a total commitment from myself.
I guess what I am saying it that aspiring artists need to focus on what they believe they want to see and use their strengths to try to achieve that end. By concentrating their efforts on their strengths, a natural style or voice will evolve. If they accept this voice with a real belief in its validity, it will soon be as natural as signing their name. They will soon be able to celebrate the things that make them different than others, rather than striving to be like them.
I don’t know if any of this is making sense this morning. I’m sure some of the above will ring true to some and ruffle the feathers of others. That’s art for you. It’s more mystery than science. I might, be right, wrong or both. Depends on who’s looking…
Redtree Times 
Thanks you for this.
Bridget– I hope this is of some help. There is no one piece of advice in art because there are so many possible paths to take. This is from my experience and may not apply to every or anyone.
I’ve always believed this. It’s the sort of advice found here and there among writers. This morning, I went looking for the phrase and happened to first bump into it on Austin Kleon’s blog. “The manifesto is this: draw the art you want to see, make the music you want to hear, write the books you want to read.”
I’m reminded of a wonderful story about Georgia O’Keeffe, reported by Joan Didion. “At the Art Students League in New York, one of her fellow students…painted over her work to show her how the Impressionsts did trees. She had not before heard how the Impressionists did trees, and she did not much care.”
I love and fully understand the O’Keeffe story and have featured Kleon’s book here before, which is where I first heard of making the work you want to see. The point was really brought home by a blogger who wrote in a brief review of my show that he was seeing the paintings he wanted to paint himself.