“For many, the notion of the artist’s creative process is shaped by the Hollywood image of the isolated, mad genius stabbing the air for ideas and then suddenly realizing them, fully formed, on a canvas, a piece of stone, or in brisk musical notation. We all know that films can’t help but stereotype their subjects, and these often romanticized characterizations seem to substitute affectations for what is really a complex and amazing process. Let me suggest instead a more realistic version of the artist in the midst of a creative process.
The artist enters the studio, armed with an idea for a painting (or sculpture,song,etc.). Often, the idea appears to the inner eye somewhat formed, but until it is physically manifest, its outline is, at best, a bit cloudy. Marks are made, colors are applied, and the object is set in motion. The creative spark is now lit, but the fire needs tending. It is INSTINCT and the willingness to trust it that now comes into play. As counterintuitive as it seems, the intuition involves countless subjective considerations and small judgments. Judgments? Yes! Not rational judgments or evaluations, but intuitive decisions-each one propelling the work of art beyond its limits. The artist must then trust (or distrust) those leaps , only to leap again and again, possibly in different and even contradictory directions. Imagine Jackson Pollock moving and dancing with the paint, using his eye and his intuition to direct his hand in order to bring a new world into clear view. The creative spark allowed him to begin- to see something that he felt needed to be rendered visible- but intuition and the audacity to trust it propelled the paintings into greatness and, finally , into history.”