• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[SP] Any SP art students? Do you struggle with it?

SwimmerGal97

New member
Joined
Sep 19, 2014
Messages
124
I've always had trouble in school. I love drawing and painting, but my talents lie in the physical use of the materials, my ability to match, harmonise and blend colour and recreate images in detail either from memory or a picture. By contrast, studying art in school we've always been pushed to give it deep meaning, beyond initial observational drawings, the accuracy of images doesn't matter as much as the concept and to really go on a journey. This has lead to a conflict: I love painting and drawing in my spare time but to me, art is about skill over the ability to convey an idea (not that either is better or more important, I just connect more with skill), but I feel in an academic environment, art is geared so much more towards intuitives over sensors (I initially thought I was an intuitive due to my imagination, but after meeting several of them and listening to their conversations I've decided I'm not- they talk about important stuff but boy do they talk and talk about it. I can only take so much). I've always been encouraged and supported on my skill obviously but that only gets me 1/4 to 1/3 of the marks. The rest is ideas, concepts and 'journeys'. All seems a bit woo woo to me. It really frustrates me how they tell you art is there to express yourself in your own way, but my way is wrong because instead of following a spiritual journey, I find it easier and more natural to create one off images that are like a snapshot of things I've seen, things that mean something to me because they express something about my own life in the way i see it (i.e. not in big ideas but smaller things that are just as beautiful) only the detail that triggered me to choose the subject, the common link, might be too small for most to see. My work is a time for me to enjoy the use of materials (I love feeling fresh paintbrushes and smooth paint on high gsm paper) as well as introspect and reflect. Generally my images reflect a memory and seem empty to others even though they trigger something in me. This has turned into more of a rant than a question, apologies for that, but back to my point, does anyone else struggle like this? Does it irk you or do you just shrug it off? I was considering a career in the creative sector but often feel I wouldn't succeed because I'm not really gritty and emotional, I just like pretty things and enjoy creating things that are pleasant on the eye. I was toting with the idea that I could be an ISFP before this post, but after reading it through am now considering ISTP, although I always though I was too... Whats a more succinct way of saying 'have absolutely no mechanical aptitude whatsoever'? And liked pretty things too much
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I can relate to a lot of what you wrote.

I did not go to art school, though growing up art was something I was very drawn to.

I am pursuing art creation now, as an adult, despite not having had a formal education, but I know I would feel very similarly to you if I were in that sort of environment. I reference photos I take for almost all of my paintings; I'm not going to lie, I don't have any grand 'expressing myself and my feelings' or some epic artistic statement of the world, or metaphor, or anything when I'm painting -- none of that is my motivation. I simply enjoy creating things I find aesthetically pleasing, and I love the usage of color. I think my personality *does* come out in the style of my paintings, so it's a side effect/result -- but it's not that I have that aim in mind when I start the painting.

I will say I need to be inspired by something in order to want to paint it; for me, nine times out of ten my inspiration is based off of my past experiences -- my hikes, certain locations I have been to, my being able to pull out my excitement and inspiration from having seen those places with my own eyes, and then wanting to convey that artistically.

So yeah, I am very much a sensor painter in approach, I think; in your own words, there's nothing 'woo woo' (lol) about my approach. I also paint very tangible, real things - as I love the tangible things in our world. The extent of my non-tangible is my avatar, basically; everything else is very real, no hidden meanings or messages. A former coworker of mine had been going to art/design school recently and I'd ask her about her classes, and many sounded more theoretical to me, as you describe, and I recall her descriptions made me self-conscious of the fact that I'd probably have a harder time with some of the assignments due to that. I don't think it would be 'bad' per se, ie I'd be gaining perhaps valuable new tools and ways to look at painting, but, it would be going against my grain and how I otherwise paint -- which isn't from some deep well of needing to express something profound, but rather, rather simple, my wanting to create something I think is pretty. ;) Anyhow, I can also identify with what you write about technique -- I think I put a pretty big emphasis on technique, and am very aware of where I fall short on that, and am always trying to improve.

Regarding how I deal with the whole topic, I try to remind myself we all have our preferences; we as creators, and, all of the consumers of art. I am distinctly aware a lot of people will find my stuff boring, uninteresting, etc, precisely because it lacks some deeper message - or, they simply dislike the aesthetics. On the other hand, another set of people will appreciate and like it. (just as I dislike a lot of art out there but am drawn to some) Try not to let peer feedback or the environment bring you down! Art should be about creating what you want, and in the way you want to do it; people saying art 'should' have some basis other than what drives you is super pretentious, especially if that would mean you'd have to be someone other than who YOU are in order to try to achieve that. Just my 2 cents.
 

1487610420

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
6,431
Institutionalised academic status quo can be hit or miss in how it resonates with any particular individual, be it in art or other fields. Often not the institution, but just different teacher's methodology and attitude can have different resonances with each student.

It can be helpful to be aware of the expected response with both the institution and, the different teachers, their perspectives and values and our own, in which way we align or not and how/to what degree we can deliver what is expected in the academic sense vs how one's personal m.o. view and aspirations can coexist or not, even if at odds, from a pure utilitarian POV, understanding their worldviews are different, or simply to move on, maybe to somewhere that better resonates, or on your own; the latter is more focused on the personal expression route, notwithstanding the need to get into the system for professional reasons.

Although I'd argue that pursuit of self drive/one's own drum/internal truth will Always be more rewarding than trying to fit in while feeling chastised.
 

miss fortune

not to be trusted
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
20,589
Enneagram
827
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
while I appreciate viewing art and going to museums and such, I suck at trying to actually make something artistic... mostly because I get stuck in some sort of perfectionistic rut and end up destroying whatever I'm attempting to create :unsure:

however, I did quite well at blueprints and computer aided design things... something about designing something practical that I could model in a way in which I could even imagine living there (or in the case of mechanical designs, something about the precision of the parts fitting together just right so that the whole thing would work out perfectly) was much more thrilling to work with than something that's just supposed to look pretty and serve no purpose whatsoever
 

Duffy

New member
Joined
Jun 13, 2015
Messages
344
however, I did quite well at blueprints and computer aided design things... something about designing something practical that I could model in a way in which I could even imagine living there (or in the case of mechanical designs, something about the precision of the parts fitting together just right so that the whole thing would work out perfectly) was much more thrilling to work with than something that's just supposed to look pretty and serve no purpose whatsoever

I agree with you. It's kinda the age old conflict between form & function. I'm doing design work right now, and it's a nice balance between science and art.

I appreciate art, in the sense that it teaches you how to see the world, or rather, to shift your perspective. Also, it's just nice being able to produce something like that. It's a nice feeling.

To answer the OP. I'm not an art student, but it sounds like something I've heard before. It's like people who draw from photos vs. from real life. Some people criticize the former because it creates bad habits and it doesn't really add anything new. Others don't really care, they make what they like. Maybe it's a similar dilemma to this.
 

ChocolateMoose123

New member
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
5,278
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
U
I've always had trouble in school. I love drawing and painting, but my talents lie in the physical use of the materials, my ability to match, harmonise and blend colour and recreate images in detail either from memory or a picture. By contrast, studying art in school we've always been pushed to give it deep meaning, beyond initial observational drawings, the accuracy of images doesn't matter as much as the concept and to really go on a journey. This has lead to a conflict: I love painting and drawing in my spare time but to me, art is about skill over the ability to convey an idea (not that either is better or more important, I just connect more with skill), but I feel in an academic environment, art is geared so much more towards intuitives over sensors (I initially thought I was an intuitive due to my imagination, but after meeting several of them and listening to their conversations I've decided I'm not- they talk about important stuff but boy do they talk and talk about it. I can only take so much). I've always been encouraged and supported on my skill obviously but that only gets me 1/4 to 1/3 of the marks. The rest is ideas, concepts and 'journeys'. All seems a bit woo woo to me. It really frustrates me how they tell you art is there to express yourself in your own way, but my way is wrong because instead of following a spiritual journey, I find it easier and more natural to create one off images that are like a snapshot of things I've seen, things that mean something to me because they express something about my own life in the way i see it (i.e. not in big ideas but smaller things that are just as beautiful) only the detail that triggered me to choose the subject, the common link, might be too small for most to see. My work is a time for me to enjoy the use of materials (I love feeling fresh paintbrushes and smooth paint on high gsm paper) as well as introspect and reflect. Generally my images reflect a memory and seem empty to others even though they trigger something in me. This has turned into more of a rant than a question, apologies for that, but back to my point, does anyone else struggle like this? Does it irk you or do you just shrug it off? I was considering a career in the creative sector but often feel I wouldn't succeed because I'm not really gritty and emotional, I just like pretty things and enjoy creating things that are pleasant on the eye. I was toting with the idea that I could be an ISFP before this post, but after reading it through am now considering ISTP, although I always though I was too... Whats a more succinct way of saying 'have absolutely no mechanical aptitude whatsoever'? And liked pretty things too much

I'm no artist but my mother is (ISTJ). She went to Ringling. She now works for Disney.
She is very much not an artist in the "deep meaning" etc stuff. She is a production artist in merchandising. So she creates - but it's a lot of organizational and layout/typefaces etc.

She also has done her own personal work (watercolor, gauche, pen and ink, etc) of her favorite musicians. Really cool stuff.

You may want to look into other jobs artists can have.

You'll have to tow the line to get through school but if your teachers are telling you something that you are hearing over and over again- I think it is safe to assume they are seeing something in your work that isn't being translated to it's best ability. Any artist, whether it's a musician, painter or author has to be able to "go deeper" into themselves and pull from it. Then use those emotions to make their desired art more dimensional. It doesn't have to be the only tool in the chest, so to speak. But you want to be able to use everything.
Take their critique and explain what you just wrote here. I think it was eloquent.
 
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
255
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
4w5
'twas an art student once at a university, found it stifling. I draw for myself and on my own terms, get lost in my work while listening to music. Smell of oil paints, graphite, feel of the pencil and brush in my hands. I do realism, into aesthetics. Figure drawing, portraits, still life.
 
Top