The Death of Painting?
Will history show us that this is true?
Can it really be so, or just out of fashion for a while. I trained as a painter at St. Martins. Later I learnt loads of stuff about pigments and binders. I even painted a freso in a museum once. I had to weave willow and make a partition wall then mixed horse hair with my mortor and did all those layers and lime putty. It was a cut away display revealing the layers of construction including the top pigmented layer.
I love painting materials the pigments. I love making images, and painting them is the initial reaction…but oh yeh, paintings dead. I will have to find another medium. This is what I have done for over twenty years now.
But should I explore it again, but here's the thing.. An inbuilt guidence system in me says 'Its a waste of time'. 'You had to throw away a skip full of paintings because you had nowhere to keep them'. This is true I did. They are bulky serve no purpose and waste time producing them when efforts could be made doing something to ern money instead.
Painting is still there. It can show and commontate on our world, just like other techno media. What might have really changed is that collectors used to buy them and hide them in collections. That was the destiny of a good painting. Does that still happen or are paintings suposed to be out there for all to see on, or in public buildings, or are they like a pre war collection of personel writings, revealing inner worlds and stored away in dusty places. Painting is a thing with no place, abit like the Palistinian People……… destined to be, but where?
