Articles by Katarzyna

Welcome again - David and the readers of the ATSH. Today briefly, but I hope to encourage you to shower this site with, as always, some interesting comments.

I know, that ‘Art Therapy’ subject is quite loaded with different meanings and, probably, not free from controversies too. Yet, from what I can see browsing the relevant pages, this kind of psychological (medical) therapy has flourished in the US, with AATA (American Art Therapy Association) looking quite fit and professional.

At the same time it remains relatively exotic in Europe and especially in Ireland. My college was first in this country to introduce Art Therapy MA degrees (based on BA Hons. in Fine Art) - they are available from 1998, became quite popular, yet it’s still far from ordinary to see Art Therapist working in institutions, schools or hospitals.

I haven’t personally met yet with any sort of this practice and know nothing about its factual effectiveness. I’m interested especially in any record, experience related to the ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder), since one case of it has been diagnosed in my family. Have you met with an art therapy “in action”? Are you yourself qualified and practicing? Do you have any opinions, thoughts or experiences on that subject, on how it works (if at all) on autistic children? Thanks for sharing.

Also of interest

• Some benefits of keeping a “Studio Journal” (2)
• Notebook (0)
• Few words on an artist’s condition… (3)
• Few not-modern notes on humanity… (0)

Also of interest

• Tell me more about…the Art Therapy (2)
• Notebook (0)
• Few words on an artist’s condition… (3)
• Few not-modern notes on humanity… (0)

Quite recently I’ve got an interesting, half-an-hour talk about nothing. It happened to be focused on modern art, modern human condition, place for beauty and ethics within it and, after making a heroic round in escaping its inbuilt vacuum it came to the point of an inception - to a rather corny remark that “nonsense” seems to be a surname of today’s existence. How to make art in the modern chaos and to remain sane? Although Louis Bourgeois wrote in her painting that Art is the warranty of sanity she wrote also I’ve been in Hell and back, and let me tell you - it was wonderful. Going to Hell is the condition of the modern artist, whether s/he comes back and is ready to admit that it was wonderful is a quite another, usually very personal story.

Since my partner in the above-mentioned chat was far from being an average, junior, intelligent guy who finds “fashionable” to talk post-modern slogans (no matter how out of place they are), we’ve managed to make a way for some deeper observations. Yet everything seemed to slip through our fingers - any sense, any understanding of each other. Why is it so difficult to communicate on a level, where any social game must to disappear in the presence of truth? Why in the age of gutsy exhibitionism, omnipresent “display” of human “values” we are mute and/or extremely amateurish when it comes to formulate, understand and convey basic reflection on our existential condition? I wonder what was that ancient Greek spoke about, or people of 18th century France, or even contemporaries of Hemingway, Kafka, Dostojewski? Have they been taught the art of communicating oneself to others or maybe times they lived in encouraged it in the most natural fashion?

So we talked about beauty which became something terribly old-fashioned, neglected and misunderstood. After Picasso and the modern rest ridiculed classical rules of harmony and pleasure it seems to be quite trendy to make art that disturbs, wipes out smile and joy; art of dark colours, sad faces and deliberately nonchalant in appearance. Even if beauty occurs it’s very often accidental, has nothing in common with beliefs and aspirations of an artist. Majority of work in my college is like that, my own work oscillates between “blue” and darkness of being alive here and now… What a waste of a pair of healthy hands. Why not to aspire to be the next Cezanne or Canova? Why not to aspire to make the happiest, the most beautiful paintings/sculptures ever? Why even these questions sound ridiculously?

It was the eternal beauty of art in Paris that grabbed my mind and heart. Who knows - maybe it’s the right time for a new Renaissanse, for rediscovering once again value and sense in our human condition? That could be even interesting…

Just for the classical taste, few shots of The Louvre’s treasures I took during my trip to Paris:

Also of interest

• Tell me more about…the Art Therapy (2)
• Some benefits of keeping a “Studio Journal” (2)
• Notebook (0)
• Few words on an artist’s condition… (3)

Don’t be too overwhelmed by the title. It’s meant to be too big to what I’m going to write here… I just need a sort of its intellectual challenge to re-start me again for the ATSH, which I was forced to neglect by some technical difficulties… To everyone who doesn’t know - I’m a contributor to this site and hoping to make most of David’s courtesy to let me be here and address you, my audience…

So, today few loose reflections on what I consider as an experience of being ‘a contemporary artist’. First of all, I must say I’m intensely reluctant to use the word when referring to myself and my identity. And it isn’t merely due being ‘just’ an art student, but it seems to be rooted in my deep belief that, what a human being undergoes in a long, complex process of making (creating) of what art critics will call ‘an artwork’ cannot be expressed in a one, semiotically distorted and culturally misunderstood and abused (just have a quick surf around ‘artistic’ pages - anything now can be called ‘art’ and anybody ‘an artist’) term. Who am I then? - somebody studying, making, dealing with art, somebody struggling with artistic means to find myself - that belief will (hopefully) never change. If so called ‘art-world’ (art lovers, critics) will name me eventually ‘an artist’ one day I will feel recognized and appreciated, but it always be a sort of a simplification of my activities, putting ‘a label’ in order to ‘classify’.

Czeslaw Milosz, one of my favourite poets had tried twice his poetically non-compromising definition of what does it mean to be ‘an artist’; and his understanding, both quite romantic and yet classical, is worth to be displayed here. So, first of all, it reminds of being a child in a world made by adults and consequently - to be always vulnerable and ready enough to hear their indulging laughter… And secondly - it’s a decision (a sane one yet transcending the ‘common sense’ level) of letting oneself to be the land of demons that rule here as if they were at home and speak numerous languages - it means to be like an always open house, without a key in the doors, so your invisible guests get in and leave with an ease…

An artist (should write ‘a genuine one’ but there are no ‘fake artists’, just like an Art - it’s true or isn’t art) then would be less a strong, self-confident individual of the personality sharp as a knife and being driven by an above-average ambition and ingenious ideas (Picasso’s , Damien Hirst’s type) but more - an extremely sensitive, open, always curious, innocent and naive in a sense (as a deliberately adopted attitude) character; so complex that appearing as simple, so powerful that letting himself to be a sort of ‘a medium’ for what is transcendent, supernatural (Mark Tobey’s name comes to my mind). Does one have to be born this way, or - is it possible to ‘made’ an artist out of nothing preexisting in him/her innately? How does it all translate into functioning in this very world of “dead” God, ‘thirsty’ dealers and agents, traffic jams, mortgages, hypermarkets, rip-off mentality? Self-deceiving, compromises, psychological disturbances?
No, I don’t want you to get an impression that I pose for a martyr or a victim… More I think about me and others being luckily ‘condemned’ to art more I believe that the game is worth all the investment and much, much more… It’s this sort of a challenge that, living in the ancient times when gods were still alive and kicking, you would say: ‘I’ve been touched by something that is greater than me, and I will never be the same man again. And it’s like a burning fire sometimes, but I wouldn’t exchange that for all the wealth of this world’

Sorry if sounding sentimental… Greetings to all art-aficionados…

Also of interest

• Tell me more about…the Art Therapy (2)
• Some benefits of keeping a “Studio Journal” (2)
• Notebook (0)
• Few not-modern notes on humanity… (0)

Peter Howson (b. London 1958) is one of these painters who are “writing” their art with their life; or - in other words - they continuously provoke challenges and arrange “scenography” in order to give their work a reason for existence. In that sense Howson occupies the opposite side to, for example, Henry Matisse or Joan Miro who lived comparatively ordinary lives of family men and their paintings seemed to emerge, first of all, from their intense inner life. Peter would be one of these artists, with whom Marcel Duchamp was likely to be fascinated. Artists with an amazing personal story and controversial work. I found myself being fascinated by that story both as a humanist and a person studying art.

Peter Howson met with violence and humiliation at a young age being bullied by his classmates. He was small, quiet and “different”, he wouldn’t play football during brakes simply because he preferred to stay inside and draw. Lately, he names his sickness of the soul as the Asperger’s Syndrome. The psychological effects of that early loneliness and brutality were to be long-lasting. At 17 he got into Glasgow School of Art (Peter’s family moved to Scotland when he was four and he’s recognized as a “Scottish” artist) but he found himself fighting with bad, non-understanding teaching.

Disillusioned, he quits school after a year and enrolls in the British Army. It’s quite an unusual move for a sensitive, introverted boy with the history of bullying. He stands military life for nine months and appreciates the period as being one of the most formative in his entire life. Personally, I admire that choice made just in the right time and probably with the instinct that in order to learn how to swim one has to throw himself into deep water. Peter Howson had confronted his fears and perhaps bad memories and he did this struggling through the hard, an extreme way. That “extreme” trait will develop to be the painter’s alter ego - Howson as we know him now.

Having finished the art school (thanks to an encouraging teacher - Sandy Moffat) Peter starts yet another fight, this time lasting throughout his mature life of an artist and man. It’s a battle of wills between Peter Howson - a victim of his own psyche and Peter Howson - a man of action and adventure, a talented painter with a great insight in the human soul.

In his early 20s the painter faces his fascination with the gym and heroes in A. Schwarzenegger’s type. Soon he admits that because he took things to a ridiculous extreme he had became so muscle-bound that he hated the way he looked. Also, his first painting series would be an acute, although slightly caricatured depiction of body builders, hard men and hooligans. At the same time the artist speaks out how much he actually detests the world he depicts: I hate violence. And I believe that everyone, no matter how gentle they think they are, has the capacity for it within them…

Through mid-1980s his profile rose steadily and within relatively short period of time Howson found himself being collected by Madonna, David Bowie, Bob Geldof and being rejected by the respectable museums at the same time. Initially thrilled by the fame he soon realizes a trap he and his admirers have set up - a trap of generating works in a one, recognized style and in a one popular thematic circle (just think about dozens of other artists who would never try to escape from such a comfortable trap). He knew he had to make himself different.

That’s how he threw himself into another very deep water - he became an official painter of the war in the former Yugoslavia, so-called Bosnian War (1992-1995). That was certainly the most extreme challenge of the “extreme painter”. First time he went unprepared and came back seriously sick, the home press labelled him “a coward”. He had returned and demanded an army uniform and to be treated like a soldier. That experience was about to make him a different man. The war is one of the most barbaric in the history - a civil butchery based on ethnic grounds with mass fratricidal killings and rapes, tortures and mutilations. Howson called it a war of violence and humiliation becoming himself a kind of a poignantly experienced expert in both. What exactly the painter witnessed remains his mystery (he rejected the presence of journalists at his second visit) but he admits that he had never been closer to suicide and - paradoxically - never felt more alive.

A series of Howson’s Bosnian huge-scaled canvases caused a big debate in Great Britain and beyond with the major media - The Times, BBC being involved. And it started even before they had their premiere at the Peter Howson: Bosnia exhibition in the Imperial War Museum (London) in 1994. Some of the paintings appeared “too explicit” for a public view (especially the powerful Croatian and Muslim depicting a brutal rape), some were questioned on a basis of their historical value as the painter admitted not to witness himself some of the scenes (but “just” using his imagination).

The paintings belong to the most powerful images of the contemporary figurative art. They depict women being raped, castrated men, hanged animals, ragged refugees and above all - anonymous faces, formidable, unforgettable physiognomies of those who went through hell. These works have the drama, fantasy, emotional intensity and visionary quality of W. Blake’s and H. Bosch’s paintings. They were born from sincerity and an authentic spiritual pain, from passion and courage, from a sinful fascination by the evil side of the human nature and a heroic struggle against it. It has to be said that the contemporary art seems to be nothing like that…

Recently, Peter Howson makes headlines over abusing drugs and alcohol. He turned towards religious themes.

In Phaidon’s 20th Century Art Book his name appears among 499 the most important artists of the past century.

Here is Howson’s official web page:Peter Howson

For further reading I do recommend books:

- Jackson, A. A Different Man, 1997

- Heller, R. Peter Howson, 1993

P.S.

Dear Readers,

With David’s permission I would like to invite you on my own page I’ve been developing throughout the last week - Terra Incognita

We agreed on cross-posting (I will publish some of my texts/images on both blogs and David - feel free to post on my site), but I would like also to contribute some pieces designed just for this site.

All The Strange Hours will remain a terrain of my debut, so it will always be a little bit special for me.

Half - term of the first term in the second year of my study has just approached. I found myself enjoying my time in the college much more than I could initially imagine, but this wouldn’t be possible without great people I met.

The main good points of study art in an institution (especially when you’re not quite independent financially) is that you’re being supplied with a free studio space, free tuitions (these depend on the country and a type of the institution), free workshops and an easy access to a very useful equipment (cameras, projectors, books etc.). There is obviously another issue too complex to be converted economically - you’re surrounded by passionates, both students and “masters”, who are there at a length of your arm each time you need a talk, an advise or a feedback.

And there are arguments contra, which tend to be equally powerful. Unless you consider yourself a psychologically strong person, comparatively sure why are you doing, what you’re doing, also- unless you’re able to reflect critically on your environment I wouldn’t recommend studying fine art in a structured manner.
First of all, you have to function within an educational program designed for majority - 18-years old students (in a case of a public college) and to fight its great potential to infantilise anyone who doesn’t need to be watched and disciplined for the most of the time just to develop properly. On the other hand it imposes a system of dividing your time (terms, time spent in studio, at lectures etc.) and marking, which can be pretty distracting and/or confusing (because we’re all humans, we want to perform for 80%, not for 40% - but does 80% make you a better artist?).
There’re tutorials and seminars where you’re expected to more or less make your teachers happy by a clear, eloquent and ambitious presentation of your progress and answering all the questions, no matter how pointless they may sound. If you’re a young, unexperienced and untrained in a logical argumentation or if you’re an introvert feeling extremely uncomfortably in being publicly exposed in that particular way, you’re in a vulnerable situation.
I remember a very quiet girl who’s no longer with us, most probably because the system I study in promotes, first of all, outgoing and intellectually able individuals which doesn’t necessary translate into promoting those truly talented and aware of what that’s really mean to study art.

So - what that’s actually mean “to study art”? I’m asking myself and all of you there, studying art each day in institutions, on your own, purely for hobby, just for fun?

I still smile recalling my chat with a teacher, a painter:
- What’s the meaning you want to convey? - he asked looking at my set of steel tubes and glass structures.
- I’m not sure if there’s any meaning I would like to convey.
- But there must be something you want to communicate.
- Do I have to communicate anything?
- You have to make your viewers aware of your intentions. You have to be responsible for the message you convey.
- What do you mean “to be responsible”?
- I mean - he said loosing his patience a little bit - that your art always tells a story. And that you are a teller. Do you know your story well enough?
- But, if I mean my painting to communicate only itself - a painting for painting…Do I have to generate other meanings just for the sake of my viewers?
- An art for art’s sake - there’s no such thing. Art happens between you, your work and those who react to it…Just look - I see your set as a cold, austere and beautiful place. If I call dozens of people I’m sure their reaction will be identical.
- But how do you know that I consciously inscribed that meaning…I just found the pieces and I liked them so I put them together…- I answered quite frankly.
We continued in that fashion until he resigned and promised to return once I will be ready “to communicate” something.

I recall that conversation simply because it made me think a lot about my study and art in general. Especially, the imperative of “communicating something” and “being responsible” for the meaning(s) my art could generate in people.
I used to work quite intuitively and even automatically, just trusting my creative potential and not caring about the outcome until the very end.
So, does “studying art” mean learning communicational and social skills which would transform me into an expert in “meanings”and reception of my work?
Or - is it simply a training in techniques and strategies for producing “readable” art-products? You may say - studying art can be partially both… But what beyond this? Or - are those aspects really that important?

Considered to function among the most intimate, personal of all arts drawing is often defined in many different ways.

Drawing appears to be an act of mark making, a product of that act, a vehicle for visual expression, a skill of seeing things as they are (copying reality), extracting an essence from a drawn object, creating fiction (eg. drawing from imagination) and many more.

What differs drawing from other means of expression (especially from painting) are materials and techniques used but also the function and purpose.

When it’s quite popular among artists, designers, architects to make preparatory sketches in a “trial and error” approach leading usually towards a finished piece; its much less recognised to produce eg. a painting as a purely introductory material made towards a drawn piece (I mean a drawing as a finished artwork).
The history of art is partially “responsible” for that. While art colleges widely recognised drawing as a “foundation of art” and a very useful excercise in eye/hand training, the products themselves remained often unsigned and were never understood as equal to paintings, sculptures or prints.

Today’s position of drawing is even worse. Discovery of photography, cinematography, mass-media and more recently multi-media made a paper-pencil based art a sort of an old-fashioned, hobbyistic interest useful for kids, some artists (“some” because there’s quite a number of professionals dealing with drawing only marginally) and people who just don’t have a camera or computer around the corner (and they’re in a need of recording/processing something visually).
There are art colleges (my college is one of them) where drawing as an independent subject doesn’t exist, no compulsory classes are functioning and students who finish their degree are at considerably various levels in terms of drawing.

One may ask - why to bother at all (as we, in the 21st century, have sophisticated electronic tools and processes for image making, recording etc)? Lets take a modern cityscape - Isn’t a photo of it (obviously in colour and enhanced on the Photoshop) or digitally manipulated design (again fabulously colourful and “busy”) a more accurate account, than a B&W modest sketch?

In our times - we like an option of “an instant life” (think about instant coffee - quick, more or less the same each time, requiring no skill or knowledge to make it, an imitation of a “real” coffee); we’re stuffed with images which are just perfect (think about the National Geographic breathtaking photos); we have no understanding and/or experience of a slow, sometimes laborious and non-efficient craftsmanship (like eg. goldsmith’s or shoemaker’s craftsmanship).
That all combines towards a model-modern-man (an average man) who doesn’t even consider himself drawing (writing) not because he thinks he’s got no talent (that’s more “advanced” thinking) or that drawing is “for artists” (writing for writers). He doesn’t even consider himself drawing (writing) because he’s got no need for translating reality that surrounds him into a meaningful and insightful set of lines on a sheet of paper (an insightful set of sentences).

We draw what we want to familiarise and to understand (that’s the main purpose of children’ drawings). Rejecting drawing doesn’t mean that we understood everything, but more that we chose another mode of functioning in our world - that of simplified, defensive, focused on symbols, stereotypes and mass-images rather than on real subjects with their real nature.
This is a point when drawing starts to shift towards its deepest meaning. Drawing as a visual voice of a particular philosophy of an individual’s life.
Philosophy of being constantly conscious, insightful, skillful enough and ready for multiple interpretations and translations of objects, settings, situations and phenomena.
This kind of drawing is a life-long challenge, understood more in terms of extracting (or looking for, researching) senses rather than simply as a technique or a product.

Also of interest

• Sanguine (0)

My name is Katarzyna Skonieczna (pron: cathrina sconetchna). I was born in Poland, I live at a little island of Cobh, South-West Ireland and study Fine Art at the Crawford College of Art in Cork. I studied literature, philosophy and theology back in Poland. I always wanted to study psychology but just didn’t have the right opportunity. I used to express myself verbally by writing short stories (and endlessly writing a book, which remains unfinished as for now) and also - visually by drawings but it was only a side interest. Then, after I made myself comfortable in Ireland I got a strong need to deepen my adventure with art; so I applied to the nearest college. My main interests concern - above all - human condition in its purest phenomena - identity, emotions, destiny (all art is about that - said my tutor and he’s right); then apects like colour, form, line. I’m passionate about drawing, oils, photography, printmaking, installation and animation/video art. I feel being inspired by Surrealism, Cubism, German Expressionism and Fanatsy/Illustartion art (eg. Patric Woodroffe). I proposed David (whom I really grateful to for this possibility) my contribution - “Studying Art” where I am hoping to reflect on some basic aspects of studying/discovering art (which puzzle and /or worry me) such as “What’s art and what is it for?” “Can art be taught/learnt - if yes which way?”, “Art in the past and today”, “What’s bad/good art?” etc. I would like also to keep a sort of a diary from my studies - notes, study work, workshops etc. Before I start I have to make you aware of two things - English is not my mother-tounge, so I apologise in advance for any misspelling (no matter how stupid it will look/sound) and for “rusty” usage of words/phrases; and another thing - I may not to be able to contribute on a regural basis - but I will do anything to keep my positive influence on this site.
P.S.
I kindly invite a lively response to my posts, because I don’t believe in writing only to myself and to the Muse. Important part of why I’m doing this is a precious opportunity to exchange opinions and thoughts. Thanks

Also of interest

• Wordpress rocks! (0)
• Two years (2)
• Thinking about this site (6)
• The new and improved “All the Strange Hours” (2)
• Ten thousand (4)