I’ve been thinking more about Eugene Von Bruenchenhein since writing about him yesterday, mainly about how he continued creating prolifically throughout his life, all the while keeping it pretty much to himself and his wife and perhaps a friend or two. I try to compare his obsession with my own need to paint and I find they are quite different or at least appear to be.
I don’t think I could do what artists like Von Bruenchenhein and other private artists have done. I don’t think I could maintain that intensity in the work if I thought it was only for myself. I suppose these artists get their satisfaction in the actual creation of the work and that, in itself, is their reward. That makes sense but is different from what drives my own obsessive need to paint.
I think that the actual creation of the work is vital to me but more important is the communication that comes with each piece. Knowing that the work is going to be seen and is going to be able to reach out to others is the driving point in what I do. If I thought that the work would only be seen by myself I probably wouldn’t create it, wouldn’t feel the need. The painting itself is an expression of something I hold inside already and wish to get across to others so, if I’m not going to show it to others, why do it?
That being said, there is work that I do periodically for only myself. I don’t do these pieces in the prolific manner of Von Bruenchenhein but those few I do are meant to stay with me and are painted only to be seen by me. They are private expressions, different parts of my own personal prism that will remain hidden from sight. Perhaps I do this because so much of my life is shown in relation to my work and feel the need to have something that is created only for my eyes. That is different than the obsessive creators. Maybe because their urge to create is so different than my own is why I find these possessed few so fascinating.
Redtree Times 