Post #447205 by THOR's on Wed, Apr 15, 2009 9:23 AM

HEY ALL...I had to jump in the Dead Bird thing here, since my name was mentioned!!! It's a really interesting subject!!

First...as always, FANTASTIC work Brad!! You are a truly masterful painter and Illustrator. I can't say enough great things. Wanted to say hi here too!

GREAT feedback from Teakey and Bigbrotiki, by the way. Well Here's my thought, for what it is worth.

Subject matter for art is something I always ponder each time I paint. I have to decide what I want to say..and what I can expect in result from the viewer. I recall at Imagineering, we were told that Walt would always tell the designers. "Before you draw a thing...ask yourself one question, WHO IS MY AUDIENCE ?" If I want to paint something and make an impact as an "artist", and not concerned with things like the nasty old words "marketability" or "commercial potential", not to mention offending anyone..etc...Well my imagination is unleashed like nobodies business. In this case, the ultimate goal is GET A BIG REACTION to my art. Many great painters had this goal alone...and not concerned with their work's marketability or who looked at it. This is valid and can produce powerful art. Will it sell more than one time as an original? Often not. But..that goes with the risk of such unfettered freedom and is to be accepted. Mark Ryden, from early in his career always impressed me as a guy focused on fine art and very "painter" in personality and goals. He seemed to want to be recognized by his art in shows, where subject matter was very open. The commercial value for him came as a secondary thing So...we might be comparing apples to oranges. It's as fine line.

I, personally consider myself more an "Illustrator" than a painter. But I recall that debate as to other artist, more noted than I, who were often labeled as both. Norman Rockwell was such a case. He was the "great American Illustrator"..but my Lord, the guy could paint!! He is also a highly collected artist..for his "paintings". So..I think deserves to be called a great painter too. But, he was always thinking of marketability and his viewers as well as the things he felt like painting. He was influenced by many of the dutch Realists and classic painters before he studied Howard Pyle, N.C. Wyeth and the other Illustrators he was inspired by. Anyway, I am getting off subject a wee.

I see Brad as both a great painter and an Illustrator that is always thinking of who will see his work (audience) and how his work can support his career, not JUST get a reaction. So, in this case, I can see how a dead bird would certainly be a powerful image to get response...even if negative. But I support his choice to leave it out based on his goals as I interpret them. Now, if I were an art buyer that said to Brad, " HEY Brad...I want you to express yourself!! Shock me...Make me laugh till I pee or am so horrified I want to climb under a rug for a week. Price is no object!". That being the objective, I guarantee Brad would paint that dead bird and a LOT more that we may not be able to even post on this site for our virgin eyes to behold". LOL! (That's a compliment, Brad.)

Anyway, I feel art has to always be looked at in the context of what the artist's intentions are...the expectations. But again, this is why art is so fun and fascinating to me. It's often not what I try to say in my work that interests me..it's what others see in it that keeps me interested. I would much rather hear other people's narration of what I painted than my own. I have heard a few people use comparison of me to Thomas Kinkade and I am not at all offended by that, but Thomas has never been an inspiration in the least ( No offense Thomas!!..I know we are both Art Center College Alum!) . "Painter's of light" and glowing windows and light radiating in a high contrast painting were born in the times of the early realist masters...it's really not a thing Kinkade invented at all, or I. The term "painter of light" is really just a good example of a well advertised marketing phrase and an artist that is more heavily commercialized than any other in our time..so he becomes associated with the light phenomenon and effect. Well if Kinkade can be the "The painter of light..", dog gonnit, I paint with flaming rum, so Maybe I can be..... " The lighter of paint", instead! lol! (just joshin')

Sorry if this was too wordy. I don't mean to take up Brad's thread here talking about my meandering thoughts and apologize in advance. My name was mentioned, so I felt inclined to comment. Great work Brad!!! Hello to Teakey and Bigbrotiki...Great thoughts!! Now, back to my coffee and painting..I need to shut up and stop procrastinating!!