Hitting the Block

September 21, 2010

3 min read

hitting-the-box

As an artist, the most difficult obstacle to generating work is the Block. That is to say, figuring out what to do next. It's a challenge that really separates art from design, and one that defines art as a self-motivated endeavor.

When I was younger—say pre-college—the Block wasn't such a big deal from me. I would draw a lot in my sketchbook, and would usually come up with something during that process that would warrant further exploration. This also wasn't exactly a problem during college either, since there was a constant string of assignments. If the assignments ever ebbed, or I just got bored, then I found something else to do that I had wanted to create for myself.

After college, several big shifts happened for me, both creatively and professionally. Creatively, I began to work almost completely non-representationally. Having just spent four years in college to study illustration, one could imagine how that might be a problem. As my personally work was moving away from a heavily representational approach, my professional direction shifted from trying to make a go of Illustration, to becoming a designer. Both of these changes are certainly connected, and though I wouldn't say that either shift was a result of the other. They simply happened rather naturally. The end result of these major shifts left me with a new means of personal creative expression, while at the same time grappling with learning new professional skills.

It's now almost nine years since I graduated from college. What it means to be an artist has changed dramatically since then, and now I'm struggling to figure out what the next thing is. I feel that I'm starting to create a body of work that is relevant to my life and my experience—something that I'm proud of—but I still search for what's next.

Somewhat at fault is the fact that I've been creating art that is, essentially, not about things. It's more about the process, the experimentation, the lasting impression that I get from the piece when I feel that it's ultimately complete. Those are important aspects of art, but I'm finding that it's just not enough for me. What I'm really searching for is inspiration from something around me. Some thing that grabs my attention and won't let go. I'm not looking for a perfect still life, or a picturesque landscape.

Ultimately, what I'm searching for is a concept.

I can't imagine a more difficult problem for an artist. It is truly the most basic, existential question an artist can grapple with and it's becoming a real struggle. I'm not sure what my next steps will be, but all I can really do right now is soldier on while trying to be receptive to the ideas floating the ether.

I know the blogfolio has a pretty limited reach, but what do you guys do? With nobody telling you what to do, how do you find the next big idea, the next thing?

Comments

alicia policia

September 22, 2010 at 1:43 am

Thanks, Ira. I don’t know if it was a fantastic response, but at least it’s an honest one. *shrug* : )

I think the thing about reading artist interviews (I compare myself to them as well, though I know I shouldn’t), is that how are we supposed to know that what they’re saying is true? I’m of the suspicion that many artists giving an interview view it as an exercise in storytelling that will captivate and therefore broaden an audience. They can make up a muse if need be.

And I think the interviewer has a part in that, too. No one wants to read “I don’t know what inspires me. I just like to work for work’s sake.” Although I think that is a perfectly fine and admirable reason to work, and I think if that is what it is all about for you, you should stick to it.

I believe, by nature, readers or outsiders or your audience (whatever you call them) WANT to read and hear about inspiration, and muses, and obscure mysticism and all of that. It does make it all mystical and dreamy and think ‘what if that happens to me! Le sigh!’ It gives it a story. And I think that as an artist looking at other artists, it’s easy to get carried away with that notion and with that feeling of an outsider observing an artist’s process, when really, it may not be any different from our own.

Inspiration can be so striking to the artist, but so simple to others, that it’s boring. Perhaps its that entire concept of our world, perceptions, and fulfillments and work as individuals compared to the archetype of ‘creative inspiration’ or ‘muse’ that is the block itself. Why do we have to compare what we do to this idea of ‘inspiration?’ Maybe there is no muse. The muse is a myth, and perhaps the only muse that is needed is contentment. Contentment in one’s work.

Sorry to wax all poetic and all. It is a thought though. Why do we struggle to find inspiration? Why isn’t process good enough? Isn’t all art a shallow motivation? Art for art’s sake worked for the dadaists, it can work for us too, right?

Again, that Salman Rushdie talk at SU comes up in my mind. I can’t remember exactly what he said though, but it was something along the lines of ‘All artists create for selfish reasons…that’s what makes one an artist.’

Sorry so long, but it is an interesting conversation, no?

ifc

September 24, 2010 at 8:14 am

Taking other artists—or anybody really—at face value can be a tricky situation. It’s probably not fair to assume the majority are just making it up, but I suppose it’s hard to say for sure. Certainly, it’s a difficult thing to call somebody out on. I do believe that the Artist has been romanticized by our culture. People assume that there are commonalities that artists share, and that just being an artist predicates certain manners and dispositions. One of those is the idea of inspiration that we’ve been dancing around.

It’s also difficult to say whether others work with the conscious purpose that they often project, or whether it’s more of a hindsight conclusion. With my work, I often do see the common threads that run through my work until later, when I’ve had a chance to look at a group of work on the wall. Then it either starts to make sense to me, or I identify the hint of an idea that I want to explore.

As far as art for art’s sake is concerned, it’s not necessarily a poor motivator. It’s just maybe not quite enough for me right now. I’ve found myself slipping into a self-repetitive cycle, that I’m not sure is producing much of worth. Latching on to a big idea may not save me, but it seems like a way out of the pattern.

As a side note, I’ve found contentment to be the anti-muse. I know some people are different, but the more settled I’ve become in life, the less motivated I feel.

ifc

September 21, 2010 at 11:38 pm

Wow, Alicia. Thanks for the fantastic response.

It’s really good to feel like I’m not the only one going through this. Every art that you read about or hear an interview with waxes poetic about their muse or their obscure mysticism.

That’s never been me, and I suppose part of this process will be coming to terms with that fact.

Right now, my work is all process. The end product is fine, and I’m somewhat attached to it, but it’s not really the purpose. I’m doing the work because I want to, and also because it feels right do keep going. At the same time, however, it feels like “working for work’s sake” is a bit of a shallow motivation.

I agree with you too, that searching for this depth is weird. It’s sort of like searching for a belief system. In a way, you have it and it’s part of you or you don’t. Forcing it won’t do any good. In general, I’m feeling like a general receptiveness to the world around me helps the most.

It’s probably something that just comes with time. That really doesn’t make it any easier…but I guess that’s all that there is to it.

alicia policia

September 21, 2010 at 12:30 pm

Ira, if I knew how to find the next big idea or the next thing for me, I would be doing it now. But I’m not. : (

Block it is, then!

I’ve had a similar artistic journey through post-college artistic life in that nothing has happened like how it happened before. And I’m ok with that — but I am very ready to move on again.

My artistic direction meandered through some pretty crappy and rough places, technically, conceptually, and personally, before it turned out where it is, and where it is has far less substance to it than I ever imagined it would. I went from creating complex schematics of symbolism that referenced history, religion, art, and literature in my mind, but that was so subtle that only I could decode to now where my art inspiration is basically ‘I want to draw a kitty,’ essentially. What happened there?

I went from being all about the content and the meaning of a piece and what I want to say, to the making of art itself being a totally selfish process that is essentially about the process of making it and how the result makes me happy.

I have no clue where it’s going next.

Where it is now, there are some things with which I am very happy, and many I am not. I feel I would be happier challenging myself some more, technically and conceptually, but that’s like saying ‘I think I would be happier if life were better, and also good.’ Very vague, indeed.

How will that manifest in the next big creative artistic step for me?

I have no idea. I guess I’ll know when I’ve hit upon it. That’s all that ever seemed to work for me, truthfully. I stumble upon ideas, and only realize their bigness once I’ve spent a while feeling around them trying to get a grip on just what they are. So that’s all I can pass along under the (poor) guise of advice.

Hence, I end up trying out just about every idea at least once, which leaves its own distinct set of problems….Sigh.

Why couldn’t I have been something far less frustrating? An accountant, perhaps (except I suck at counting). Grumble!

Comments are closed.