On Sep 28, 2010, at 11:39 AM, Stuart Fisher wrote:
I like your stuff. It isn’t easy though. Not the kind of stuff that would sell easily in Jackson Hole or Scottsdale. Not a single kitten with big eyes, no buffalo and calf. No time worn Indian faces. Your work is challenging. It has intellectual content that most people aren’t looking for over their sofas. Reminds me of the conflict between popular science writing and scientific publication in journals. Of course the latter has no market value. Nobody makes money writing what I write. But it IS appreciated and does move the enterprise forward. So where do artists go who advance the field but aren’t popular? Seems like they ought to be in academics where they don’t have to sell anything to survive. Or is that impossible in art? Do artists have to have popular appeal, at least at some level? I always think of the impressionists. They were pursuing a new form of expression, yet they all seemed to want to sell. Was it just because they needed the money or did success require a certain modicum of appeal to the public?
Do you think your color blindness is evident in your work?
Thanks for the blog. Keep it up.