More Venus Reflections
The painting I did, a few days ago has generated some of the kindest and nicest email I have ever recieved. Most especially nice were words from Bette and Phillip Jose Farmer who really love the piece and want to own it.
And another comment was gotten from someone who doesn't really like Sci Fi/Fantasy art, and her response was amazing, and made me feel like I was really doing, from time to time, something that mattered and stood on it's own. I had another person email me a copy of some painting I did-one of those gawdawful airbrush things I used to do-and the comparison was amazing and, stark. I've realized since dropping the airbrush over 10 years ago, my health has improved and, my work has improved into the stratosphere. I like work that LOOKS like a painting, not a glitzy photo! That's what the paintings a day have done. I also got the same kin of comments on two Mike Resnick paintings I did-one for his IVORY book.
Paintings like VENUS ON THE HALF SHELL are pretty much turning points for me. It came out exactly as I 'imagined' it would. And people liked it who don't necessarily like Sci Fi. It doesn't get better than that. Not that I really consider the book VENUS ON THE HALF SHELL, "solidly" science fiction. Has the trappings, the visuals...but it's far far more. It's a search for the meaning of life, as I saw it. That needs something more than tentacled creatures.
As can be evidenced by the below works for Lumley, I'm turning somewhat darker. I get asked why I have this predilection for horror and am even turning alot of Sci Fi pieces into something dark. We live in a dark, largely unhappy world. That's how I see it anyway, if people can convince me differently, let them try. My feelings and work reflect this darkness and horror that I see. That's also a mission of art, not to show you what you will see as a happy thing but sometimes, the frightening reality-at least it's a metaphor for that. If someone wants "sweetness and light" then go look at them Kinkades...
And another comment was gotten from someone who doesn't really like Sci Fi/Fantasy art, and her response was amazing, and made me feel like I was really doing, from time to time, something that mattered and stood on it's own. I had another person email me a copy of some painting I did-one of those gawdawful airbrush things I used to do-and the comparison was amazing and, stark. I've realized since dropping the airbrush over 10 years ago, my health has improved and, my work has improved into the stratosphere. I like work that LOOKS like a painting, not a glitzy photo! That's what the paintings a day have done. I also got the same kin of comments on two Mike Resnick paintings I did-one for his IVORY book.
Paintings like VENUS ON THE HALF SHELL are pretty much turning points for me. It came out exactly as I 'imagined' it would. And people liked it who don't necessarily like Sci Fi. It doesn't get better than that. Not that I really consider the book VENUS ON THE HALF SHELL, "solidly" science fiction. Has the trappings, the visuals...but it's far far more. It's a search for the meaning of life, as I saw it. That needs something more than tentacled creatures.
As can be evidenced by the below works for Lumley, I'm turning somewhat darker. I get asked why I have this predilection for horror and am even turning alot of Sci Fi pieces into something dark. We live in a dark, largely unhappy world. That's how I see it anyway, if people can convince me differently, let them try. My feelings and work reflect this darkness and horror that I see. That's also a mission of art, not to show you what you will see as a happy thing but sometimes, the frightening reality-at least it's a metaphor for that. If someone wants "sweetness and light" then go look at them Kinkades...
posted by Bob Eggleton (Zillabob) | 11:22 AM
4 Comments:
While I love the style of your current work I think many of those "gawdawful" airbrushed paintings were equally good.
DAVID AND GOLIATH, to name just one example, is one of my alltime favorite astronomical paintings (for that matter, your early astronomicals hold about 7 of my top ten all-time favorites in that specialty---the others being held by Bonestell).
Ah...but Bonestell never used an airbrush. He worked in oils-which I have switched over to. Also, I think space art was more interesting when we knew less. It's a pretty boring place in reality. It's why I continue to have fun with it, doing "retro" works, and they way things *should* have looked rather than the way things are. The past is far more exciting than, the future. The future is pretty boring.
Also, I think space art was more interesting when we knew less. It's a pretty boring place in reality.
I stronly disagree with you on two scores.
First, what we do know about space I find utterly fascinating. Sure, the colors most space artists use are exaggerated as compared to what the naked eye would really see--but that doesn't make the reality boring to my mind. It just requires greater sublety for someone trying for total realism (not that thats a requirement for space art...or any other kind of art).
Second, we know only the barest fraction about whats out there. Its quite a bit early to claim the cosmos is "boring" seeing as how we have yet to even visit another of the many billion solar systems in our galaxy. Much less another of the billions of other galaxies.
The past is far more exciting than, the future. The future is pretty boring.
I not sure if you mean that in the broad sense of the total future imagined by SF or are still referring exclusively to space art and what we'll really find out there.
Either way, I couldn't disagree more.
But, hey, as long as you keep painting remarkable work like the two in the post below I can live with your loss of interest in the future (perplexing as I might find it).
I think that, my best example of what I think is Bonestell's SATURN FROM TITAN imagery. Iconic. Inspiring. Now, we find it's a muddy ball with a smog around it obscuring such a view. Does it ruin the painting? No. Same with his Mars scape with blue atmospheres. Looked better. And the moon...it was like it was the moon's FAULT for being a rolling grey golf course, than the craggy peaks Bonestell showed. I think space art, is best created, with more imagination, than science.A great deal of newer space art, is diagramatical. It means someone has "directed" it. That's all whats sells today. I do have two planned, in the new technique that brings a fantastical, and even allegorical view of something we can only dream about. The subject is not the science, but the feeling of scale and vastness-that's the common demononator with all that I try and do. I try to create massive scale. The scale of the scene, the space image, the monster, is what I go for. Maybe even, a comment on Global Warming. The rest is just dressing.
Post a Comment
<< Home