Art Quote for the Day

18 May 1985

The way I paint, one can’t really paint, because the basic prerequisite is lacking: the certainty of what is to be painted , i.e. the Theme.  Whether I mention the name of Raphael or of Newman, or lesser lights such as Rothko or Lichtenstein, or anyone else, down to the ultimate provincial artist – all of them have a theme that they pursue, a ‘picture’that they are always striving to attain.

When I paint an Abstract Picture ( the problem is very much the same in other cases), I neither know in advance what it is meant to look like nor, during the painting process, what I am aiming at and what to do about getting there.  Painting is consequently an almost blind, desperate effort, like that of a person abandoned, helpless, in totally incomprehensible surroundings – like that of a person wh possesses a given set of tools, materials and abilities and has the urgent desire to build something useful which is not allowed to be a house or a chair or anything else that has a name; who therefore hacks away in the vague hope that by working in a proper, professional way he will ultimately turn out something proper and meaningful.

So I am as blind as Nature,who acts as she can, in accordance with the conditions that hinder or help her.  Viewed in this light, anything is possible in my pictures; any form , added at will, changes the picture but does not make it wrong.  Anything goes; so why do I often spend weeks over adding one thing? What am I making that I  want? What picture of what?

30 May 1985

No ideology. No religion, no belief, no meaning, no imagination, no invention, no creativity, no hope – but painting like Nature, painting as change, becoming, emerging, being-there, thusness; without an aim , and just as right, logical,perfect and incomprehensible  ( as Mozart, Schoenberg, Velazquez, Bach, Raphael, etc.) We can identify the causes of a natural formation, up to a point; the same causes have led to me and , in due course, to my  paintings, whose immediate cause is my  inner state, my happiness, my pain, in all possible forms and intensities, until that cause no longer exists

The Daily Practice of Painting by Gerhard Richter

Advertisement

Art Quote of the Day

” The great creators tend to have talent.  They reveal a natural knack for thinking and doing in their specialties.  Whether gifted in mathematics, music, drawing, or whatever, they find that those gifts support their creative endeavors. An apt example of such talents, again, is Mozart’s musical memory.  Mozart reportedly had a phenomenal memory for music – both others’ and his own – and this memory served him well, making possible an in-the-head approach to composing which would not have worked for another.  So, it’s natural to urge a talent theory of creativity.  If creativity is whatever a person has that makes the person creative, then that “whatever” might be talent.

proposition: Creativity derives from a talent or set of talents.

This propostion does not state the issue too well .  It would be odd to say that Mozart’s musical memory caused his creativity. True, perhpas it made it possible the sort of music Mozart composed. Certainly  it made possible his approach to composing.  But just as certainly someone else might have had an equally potent memory and used it quite uncreatively .  As with Mozart’s memory, so too in general a talent might relate to creating only in allowing a certain order of creative achievement, but without at all making the person creative.  Such talents, even if extraordinary, aren’t properly a part of a person’s creativity , because a person could have those talents without being creative.  What would a specifically creative talent be like? It might be an ability for ideas getting or insight, for instance.  Whatever its form, having such a talent should in itself make the person that much more creative.”

The Mind’s Best Work by D.N. Perkins