I want to make large scale drawings/paintings/installations that deal with the structure of looking.
One of my profs recommended the book "Vision and Painitng: The Logic of the Gaze" by Norman Bryson. I've read the first chapter already and despite it being verbose in some sections, I think it will be interesting for the theoretical underpinnings of my practice. The Plinian model of representation is something that I want to question ie. painter as communicator of perceptual material to viewer as the site of reception eager for perceptual satisfaction.
I want to use the "mark" as my tool, building block. The poetry of the artist's hand is important to my work, not in a heroic sense, ie the grand gesture, because life is not heroic. Life is a series of small moments that accumulate into a lifetime. The mark is a measure of moments.
Perhaps large fields to immerse your field of vision, again Kusama, Guston.
Why? Why should anyone care?
Something that Bryson already touched on in the first chapter was that the success of a painting using the Plinian model was based on the speed of which the viewer consumes the perceptual material presented by the painter. Any interuption is seen as negative. I can tell that this model is antithesis to my existing process, but it's interesting for me to know why and how. I think this will help immensely.