Noted in my previous posting the early influence of the drawings of Nicolai Fechin and the three I showed recalled the influence of drawings of the whole figure which is what I was attracted to at the time. Just come across others of his work which zoomed into hands and feet. Did I look at these at the time? I can't recall. But it is fascinating to place alongside each other some hands and feet:
Nicolai Fechin - 1881 to 1955
I must never forget,
and never will forget,
the early fundamental impact
of the drawings of Nicolai Fechin:
"No one can teach you how to paint and how to draw except you yourself. You cannot learn how to paint by watching a well-trained master painting, until you yourself, have learned how to paint with some understanding first. Only by the path of much practice and experience can mature results be reached."
After something like 16 years of life-drawing I am really enjoying the mature outcomes from my practice and experience, in the forms of both 'process' and 'product'.
Drawings of Nicolai Fechin that inspired me................
One can have a plan: Today I will try to build upon last weeks achievements; or I will develop further my squiggle technique; or I will attempt to engage with much greater anatomical detail; or I will further explore levels of transparency and overlap and superimposing; etc., etc.
BUT plans are never fulfilled. Why? Because there are numerous variables, which can be anticipated to impact, but when they do they come as a surprise and so disrupt any pre-conceived plan.
I have attempted to control these unwanted and unexpected impacts by defining my own controllable parameters: A1 white 220gsm cartridge paper, portrait format, a fine-liner pen in each hand, sitting at my easel.
I have talked of these variables before on this blog: how I am feeling both within myself and with life in general; the journey over to the studio; how much I have looked at my recent works and the extent of my self-analysis; the model, and how they present themselves; the ambiance of the studio; etc.,etc.,
This morning followed on from a week during which I have been coming to terms with my final decade on this earth. Six months on from my 80th birthday I have entered a period, not only of reflection, but of anticipation of the decade ahead.
The global context of extreme climatic changes, massive population growth, increasing economic and climatic migrations, wars and social inequality, these and many other issues I find I am placing alongside my own self-centered concerns about my health and my increasing awareness that my body and my mind is changing. Most of the time I feel I can handle all of this through my chosen way of how and where and with whom I live. I then have the added bonus of life-drawing!
It was very much against this background which I have outlined above that this morning's drawings emerged. I am not claiming that a revolution occurred. I am not claiming they surpass anything I have produced before. But Paul Fowler did observe a 'freedom' and an 'enjoyment' in the process he was seeing.
Take a look and see what you think. I believe Paul hit the nail on the head: it was how I felt. I was carefree in my attitude in my response to each and everyone of Shelley's amazing poses.
'Conceptual Integration'- this is a term I have come across to describe when I perceive and prefer to think of the operations of my two hands not as separate activities but as a single activity. However, it may be that in my two-handed activity I am distracted from the task in hand by attempting consciously to co-ordinate and integrate my two hands, and in so doing I am inhibiting my perceptual and cognitive processes and thereby reducing the 'quality' of the product of the drawing process.
Here are some questions which arise when I start enquiring into my two-handed drawing process: Are two hands faster than one hand? Do I map out my initial response quicker (or differently) by using two hands? Do I delve deeper into the pose, and do I see things sooner, with two hands?
I have read that "the advantage of two hands becomes more pronounced when the task becomes more difficult" How does one judge 'difficulty' in a life-drawing situation? Can I set/decide upon the degree of difficulty myself? Do I do this by electing what to draw? Where to start? Which anatomical part attracts?
When I was well into my two-handed process Paul Fowler observed that the marks from the mark-making of my left hand were much more 'lyrical' than those from my right or skilled dominant hand. So, it would seem that unless one is purely ambidextrous, if you are going to draw something with your non-dominant hand you have to think about it more, you have to focus a degree of concentration upon it. By contrast the right hand is responding, in a skilled way, which may be described as a sub-conscious and intuitive response.
I am unsure as to where this analysis takes me. I feel it is important to attempt an understanding of my technique but I am going to resist a scientific enquiry into my art. What I do know (from my past experience of compiling posts on this blog) is that any reflection/questioning/self-analysis which I do will be beneficial as it will nudge my art along its journey [paths are made by walking].
Is this very recent drawing a departure which could herald a new direction? I don't think so.
Two examples of experiments during the earlier years in my my life-drawing journey.
In both these 'squiggle' drawings the points of my pens or pencils worked closely together on the surface of the paper equally contributing to the mark-making process. I recall that no final concept or form was anticipated and the composition of morphed parts simply emerged and evolved at random in the early stages. I am sure that about half-way through the time of doing the drawings when it was becoming clear of the direction that the drawing was taking then this was helped on its way by conscious compositional thoughts.
August 2013. A male and a female model posing together for about an hour and a half. Selected parts morphed together with a fine-liner pen in each hand.
