a simplified cubism emerging?

A simplified cubism: I'm not referring to the first two drawings. These are representative of my old school. The first, a whole pose attempting to quickly respond to 'the gesture', the twist of the body, and the spatial suspension. Includes three mark-making tools, i.e. fine-liner pen, graphite pencil and charcoal. Executed with both hands operating simultaneously. The second merely a catalogue of hand and feet holding on or supported by the straps. Can you sense my lack of enthusiasm for these?

Sorry! I appear to have deleted the second drawing. Will add it later.

But in these next three I am sensing a continuation in the evolutionary path of my engagement with my cubism, which I have extensively talked about in recent postings. In these I seem to recall (and it was only the day before yesterday that I was over at Paul Fowler's 'Extreme Poses in Stroud drawing the wonderful Katie) that I was consciously responding to her within the parameter of employing only two scales. My Picabia type responses had on occasions employed multiple scales of different parts and including multiple perspectives. Yet here the two scaled drawings in each composition can be clearly identified.

I am particularly enjoy the middle one. It appears that I have simply exaggerated by bringing forward her left leg and foot supported by the plinth. This went in first as I was immediately attracted to it as it advanced toward me just above my eye level and her toes, curling over the edge of the plinth, just over one metre away from my seated viewpoint. So that was the first ten minutes of the 30 minute pose. I then felt I wanted to engage with the perspective of the rest of the pose and particularly her right arm and face as it leant away into the distant space beyond. This then became another drawing, having its own and different plinth line. I recall having no expectation or no conscious thought about how these two drawings, at different scales, would actually meet together and what the eventual detailed juxtapositioning and outcome would be. There is no conscious designing of the composition. In fact I deliberately avoid this and often eagerly await the act of standing back (when the 30 minutes are up) to experience what has emerged on the paper.

It seems the employment of my two-scales approach resulted in the plinth being drawn twice, and this outcome has enforced my understanding that when one views a pose the whole is difficult to embrace in one go, and as the eye travels around the pose and looks more closely at each part and begins to really see each part then within this emerging three-dimensional perceptual structure different perspectives, different scales, and different viewpoints operate. I suppose it is stating the obvious, but I'm not simply sitting or standing beside my easel viewing the pose and thinking about this. The actions of exploratory mark-making on and within the space of the paper are fundamental to the emerging perceptual process of each sitting. My researches have suggested I am describing here the experience of and entry into the 4th-dimension (also see previous postings on this).  If this is the case then my controlled use of just two scales has clarified this for me and in itself is a component of my cubism.

Feet out of context

Life-drawing colleagues frequently applaud my feet. I do hands just as well. But here is a quick compilation of  recent feet.

A poem full of ambiguity

Here we are at the Spring Equinox, a turning point in our solar alignments, and in the seasons, and I am feeling a turning point in my life-drawing, which I have recently described using the terms

• spatial ambiguity
• transparency drawings
• simultaneous representation of entirely different viewpoints

Am I seeking for a new language which leaves behind

• my morphism
• my collage
• my overlap
• my superimposition
• my exaggeration. 

Are these now fundamental to my art (will always be there)?
How will I evolve?
What part will Picasso, Cezanne, Bellmer, Hockney, Schiele, play?
Will I now evolve from them OR will I go deeper into their ways?
How significant is Picabia?

Ambiguity, significantly raises itself, i.e. the quality of being open to more than one interpretation. There occurs doubtfullness and uncertainty as regards interpretation. But I say this from the beholder's viewpoint. Whereas my interest is that I am creating this in my drawings from within myself. And not from a conscious attempt to generate confusion.

I have noticed (through my own observations and analysis of my recent drawings) that I frequently include:
a) the overall 'gestural' form, together with
b) a detail (hand, foot, breast, head profile, etc.).

This can be a result of me wishing to respond to and record the whole pose (because of its beauty), but also to get up close to and inter-react with a fascinating part of the anatomy:
a) conveying/capturing the essence of the gesture
b) focussing on a 'characteristic' of the anatomy of the muse.

The above are my five drawings (Sorry! Presented in reverse order) from the five 30 minute poses (March 21st 2019) by Andrew up in the ropes at 'Extreme Poses' which are the life-drawing classes designed and tutored by Paul Fowler at Pegasus Art in Stroud, Gloucestershire, England.

The poses created by the model, supported within the harness of straps, suspends for the life-drawer the traditional conventions associated with the standing, sitting or lying pose. Already there is presented a deconstruction and a challenge to the norms of life drawing. So, from this radical base, the student of life drawing is automatically stimulated to develop their own response. For almost a decade now I have found this a continuing challenge which has allowed me to realise a particular and personal response. One which seems to evolve with each Thursday morning session. And one which is facilitated by 'muses of devotion' and a 'tutor of insight'.

Jemma on March 14th at 'Extreme Poses'

Inspiration thro' experimentation with Clare at 'Extreme Poses'

For a student of the human form and anatomy our model Clare is an inspirational delight. Perhaps more than any previous models at Paul Fowler's 'Extreme Poses' at Pegasus Arts in Stroud she takes on the task of climbing into the ropes and pushing the boundaries of challenging poses. Many have done this before, and Clare is up there with them as she utilises her athletic and performance skills to place before us a range of gestural anatomical structures that ask us to go beyond the usual conventions of life-drawing. After a few years of life-drawing I ached for change to the standing, sitting or lying body. Discovering Extreme Poses was a revelation, and from the first visit I have evolved, almost at every visit. So, these ten drawings are my latest. And they follow a very satisfying three days at Niel Bally's studio in Talgarth, which seemed to provoke in me quite a session of reading, research and reflection, which I appear to have externalised and described in my very recent postings. I have talked of dialogue between artist and model, back and forth, two-ways...…….Thanks Clare! ….For me this is the outcome...………………………

3 days in Talgarth - fifteen drawings

I look

I draw

I see

I experiment

I then see differently

I analyse

I research

I make connections

I begin to understand my art

In this process, recently, I place Cezanne, Picasso, Duchamp, Picabia, Schiela, Bellmer and Hockney as those who have helped me to gain meaningful insights into my drawing the nude.

The above are my first drawings from the first morning at Niel Bally's 3-days of life drawing over in Talgarth. I have talked of my cubism, and here the model moves around, standing and stepping forward and lying and rolling over, reminiscent of Duchamp's 'Nu descendent l'escalier' of 1912. What a start to further my fascination with viewing a muse from different viewpoints simultaneously.




But then, something far more conventional and classical. The issue of 'perspective',  and how much to bring forward and to exaggerate the part of the pose nearest, and how much to diminish and reduce that part of the pose furthest away. I have so many times explored this issue and looking back thro' my blog they come up time and time again.

I have used the bench in a metaphorical sense in a recent posting as a base for exploring and explaining where I am in my life-drawing journey. Here the model moved around on the bench and each time I quickly responded to the moment.

In these next two drawings I would like to think I am touching upon an essence of cubism which is looking at the same object from different viewpoints simultaneously. I am unsure how this happens in the single pose. But, I am looking down upon and at the same time looking up from underneath. Also here we find parts of the anatomy of the pose are located within a larger outline of the whole pose.

I am so pleased to have been influenced by those lovely line drawings of fusing couples by Egon Schiele. Here the model turns from one side to the other in a fairly quick pose

This is an example of my 'morphism'. I select a part which appeals and draw it, then the next part, then the next and gradually a form emerges which goes beyond the pose itself. I am unsure about my degree of control or consciousness as the drawing takes place. I am often taken-a-back when I stand back from my easel and observe the outcome on the paper. I feel I am touching Hans Bellmer but without the erotic.

Not at all sure about this next one, as I am unable to place it within my current pre-occupations. My jury is out, at the moment.

The next two poses are placed with a large mirror beyond. The setting is quite complex. The model is lying upon a sloping surface and the mirror is not vertical but angled. So we have quite a challenging contextual geometry. I still am unable to recall where the dangling arm, from the top right down through the centre of the composition in the first drawing, came from.

Finally, this is my final drawing of the three days, and perhaps the most significant in recent researches to try and comprehend my art. I am still within the process of justifying my high level of satisfaction with it. Take a look, and I will then try to explain my thinking...…………..

Picasso and Braque developed their cubism from Cezanne. They looked at objects from multi-viewpoints simultaneously They revealed what was beyond, behind, unseen by others. They challenged the restrictions of one-point perspectives. Cezanne had structured his landscapes into a series of planes, one in front of the other. Picasso and Braque took the eye into the space of the landscape and painted what they saw looking down and back and beyond. Then Picabia came along and went one huge stage further and introduced transparency so that we could see though what was in front to the world beyond.

So here is my analysis of this final drawing:
there are four (Cezanne) planes

• the foot
• the knee
• the Courbet area (I name it the Courbet area after his 'L'Origine du monde' of 1860)
• the curve of arms, breasts and head.

In making the drawing I placed the curved arc, of the arms with breasts and head above, in first. This was a strong form and attracted my attention at the start.
The foot advanced towards me, and I wanted to respond to this. So I drew the foot. Big. And I became aware that the big toe was slanting to the right and that there was a relationship with her head that was slanting to the left.
I then engaged the idea that there were two other parts of the anatomy spatially located between the foot and the original arc of arms and breasts. So the knee with it's expressed patella, and the Courbet area, went in.
I recall I was conscious that each of these four parts would require their distinctive individual scale, and so this has appeared to have taken place. In other words 'perspective' has structured the overall composition.
My final intervention was to introduce the form of the lower leg extending up across the paper from the foot, and also the outline of the leg above and below the knee. This introduced a significant degree of transparency into the drawing and engaged with my recent understanding of the works of Picabia.

I feel there is a great deal more to contribute in the analysis of this drawing. This will emerge over time.