Questions about Ed

I've run into a few questions and some unwelcome advice (as well as clumsy commentary) about this painting of my friend, Ed Mayfield. So I'd like to answer those questions and nip the unwelcome criticism and critique in the bud.

About Ed: he is indeed a real cowboy, rancher and world renowned expert on horses. Ed is also an art lover with an unsually keen eye for detail, and narrative. I previously painted his wife, Joan, and I think very highly of these nice people. They were kind enough to let me paint them, and let me hang out....and give their horses apples and carrots. Nice, nice people.

Now about the painting. So let me give over my thoughts on critique and unsolicited advice: I hate critique and unsolcited advice. I'm well aware of the history of critique in socio-political ranges, and the later application to art. It is an unwelcome intruder and antithetical to achieving solutions to inquiry, the opposite of corrective analysis, and a passive aggressive form of vandalism. There are other methods which provide analysis, peer problem solving, and collaboration, and these are not widely evangelized, though very effective. Critique is a humbug.

To would be critics and internet trolls who are looking to practice what you were taught in school about critique: I am uninterested in your reflexive opinions. As can be imagined, I seek out specific discussion and advice with my peers who have a sense of courtesy, interest and decorum as well as a high degree of expertise. If I need help, I'll graciously ask for it in a careful and precise way. Likewise, where possible, when asked I try to provide the same. My work is not posted to get your input or your thoughts on how I should execute my work, though compliments are always appreciated. Posting online is not an invitation to be a victim or subject to any and all opinions.

Several comments have been offered to me regarding the proportions of this picture, at times with the sense I'd been "caught" in a mistake. A strange stance, and annoying. The figure in this painting when seen across a room will appear out of proportion. This painting is life size and unlike the presentation in video screens exists in a setting. The viewer has an ideal spot. Depth and distance are tools that can sculpt inportance and familiarity. In this painting, and Joan's painting, I used a distortion effect- anamorphic distortion. Likewise, I used controlled detail. Controlled detail causes a viewer to automatically find their area of focus. When too distant the detail will draw them closer, when too close the visible brush strokes or blending with set them back. The distance to the painting will be fairly close, like standing near a friend. Being a flat surface with a fairly wide area , the controlled anamorphic area is loosely guaged on how many "saccades" or eye flicks from the central point of his face down his arms and torso. That is I'm estimating the distortion needed to compensate for closeness. I want the viewer to be standing at the distance one would for a friend, to be Ed's friend, and distorted the proportions accordingly. At that close distance he looks proportionate. This is not exceptionally clever of me as these are tactics used centuries ago, well before the camera based snap shot format people most often expect today. This isn't to sneer at photography, which I love, but to say I'm using tactics appropriate for a painting.

It has to be recalled paintings exist in situ and have properties different than those presented in video. To say some of the comments I've heard could be described as "speaking before thinking", would be a restrained description. I'm not sure if it is the online format of socialization, or isolated self delusion while people read online, but it is not an extinct practice to be considered and considerate in discourse.

I want to make it clear, anyone's and everyone's opinions about art are not a free for all nor is art "subjective". That humbug idea was debunked long ago. Art is a strange and mysterious thing and any and all tangential views are not only unwelcome, they also tend to unmask stupidity in the speaker. It is perfectly okay to ask real questions, but declarations and commentary do real damage. As I am the only advocate my work has, its only hero, I will be safeguarding my endeavors with much less patience here forward.

If you are an artist, take commentary and critique personally-every time. It is meant personally. Also defend your work, but don't lose sight of the fact that the expert and professional opinions of peers are valuable, and improvement is always needed. Be smart in finding your peers.