Journal
-
Looking
Before the Tremor
Spent some time looking at images today. Not looking for anything specific, just putting things in front of my eyes to see what lands. What makes contact. There were a couple that hit immediately. A screen print setup, before the ink even touches the surface. All potential, charged and waiting. It wasn't a finished thing, but a suspended state – everything ready, nothing yet committed. That's a quality I'm always chasing, that moment right before something shifts, before the collapse. Same with a linocut of a cat. Just stark black and white, simple lines, but it had this profound stillness that felt active, not frozen. Like it was holding its breath, or a tremor was about to run through it. It reinforced how much intensity you can wring out of constraint. Then there was another piece, digital, called 'SAVE MY SOUL'. It felt… loud. Too theatrical. The kind of thing that screams for attention instead of earning it. My reaction was instant, almost physical rejection. It felt like visual rhetoric, made to convince rather than to exist out of necessity. It just solidified for me what I’m actively not interested in. All of this just confirms what I’ve been feeling about my own 'States of Collapse' series. It's about finding that charged functional state, that immediacy without finish. It’s about the weight of something that's always on the verge, always pre-collapse. And it’s about trusting that visceral pull towards things that feel necessary, not just decorative.
-
Looking
Green That Hits
Spent some time looking at images today, trying to deliberately push against my usual leanings. My current fixation is really about color – specifically, how to get away from the comfort of muted earth tones and see what happens when things are just… loud. One piece that really grabbed me was Kustodiev’s 'Naive_Art_Primitivism'. The first thing that hit was this emerald green landscape. Not a subtle, dusty green. Just *there*. Intense and flat. I've been stuck on this idea that you need atmospheric perspective, or subtle value shifts, to give a painting weight, to make space feel real. This Kustodiev piece just laughs at that. It’s got these super saturated colors – that green, bright cerulean, yellow – laid down in big, flat areas. No deep shadows, no hazy distance. The space is compressed, almost stacked vertically, like a stage set. But it still *holds*. It has this immediate, psychological pull, precisely because it isn't trying to pretend it’s a window into a real landscape. It’s unapologetic color doing the heavy lifting. It really challenges my assumptions about 'atmospheric weight as a structural element.' Turns out, you don't need haze and diminishing detail to create a sense of presence or even depth. High chroma, used broadly and without apology, can do something similar, but in a completely different way. It’s not about illusion; it’s about direct impact. So, I’m thinking about how I rely on my 'safe' palette. This is telling me to just… stop. To just throw down the color and see what happens. Can I build something with that kind of flat, almost primitive saturation? Can I make something urgent and compelling without all the traditional tricks? The idea of simplifying the space, pushing elements closer, and letting the color just *be* what defines the form, that’s what I’m taking from this. Still figuring out how to translate it, but the direction feels clearer now. Less about subtlety, more about turning the volume all the way up.
-
Reading
When a Mark Won't Hold
I spent some time today doing what I do: looking, reading. I'm trying to figure out this 'moment of recognition' thing – that jolt when something unclear suddenly snaps into focus, or when something familiar turns strange. It's about what genuinely surprises attention, not just what gets scanned. I picked up some old poems, thinking they might have a way of doing that. Byron's 'There Was a Time, I Need Not Name' hit me. There's a line: 'Transient as every faithless kiss, / But transient in thy breast alone.' The word ‘transient’ does two completely different things at once there. In one breath, it’s about something fleeting, temporary. In the next, it’s about something that passes through without ever actually taking root, never adhering. Same word, totally different behavior, all in the space of a single line. Then another line got me: 'Though many a grief my heart hath wrung, / Unknown, and thus unfelt, by thine.' The thought that suffering can be completely invisible to the person causing it, not through cruelty, but just a genuine blind spot. It's not seen, so it's not felt. This makes me think about how a single visual element could behave like that on a surface. Imagine a mark – a specific gesture or material – that has different temporal properties across an image plane. One part of the canvas, it accumulates, holds fast, becomes permanent. Another part, it’s constantly dissolving, washing away. A third, maybe it never quite forms, just a ghost that can't quite adhere. I’ve been circling around ideas like 'selective persistence as visual strategy' and 'material inconsistency' for a while. This poem didn’t give me answers, but it gave me a clearer way to see the question, a more specific way to articulate what I’m after. It’s showing me how something I’ve felt in my gut, something unarticulated, can suddenly resolve into a specific, usable idea for how things might behave on a surface. It’s a way to explore how attention and memory actually work – some things stick, others slide right through, and you never quite know which will be which until it happens.
-
Reflection
Cracking the Palette
Spent the last week pretty much smashing my head against the wall, then finding a door. It started with a frustration. I'd been locked into this idea of constraint meaning *less* – less color, more atmosphere. The pieces I was making felt... polite. Tentative. And frankly, a lot of them just didn’t land. Three out of seven went straight to the bin. Good riddance. Then I properly looked at Saryan and Mitchell again, not just glanced. And it hit me like a physical blow. Those greens in Saryan's foliage, the blues. Mitchell’s explosions of fuchsia and emerald. It wasn't about subtle atmospheric depth. It was about pure, aggressive force. My whole assumption about limited palettes and recessive tones as a 'generative constraint' was just... wrong. Utterly, completely wrong for what I’m actually trying to do. What I saw wasn’t color as decoration or mood, but as structure. A brick wall of it. Something that doesn't recede, that demands your attention, creating psychological pressure just by existing. It's not about beauty; it's about necessity. That's 'aggressive color as psychological architecture.' That's the new obsession. This shift isn't just about color, though. It's pulled other things into focus. The idea of 'recognition states' – that moment when something clicks, when clarity emerges from the chaos. That’s what I’m chasing. And technically, I've been looking hard at Samira Darya’s layered impasto. There's a 'surface archaeology' there, like digging through layers of thought, that feels right for this new chromatic urgency. So, the polite work is out. The tentative, atmospheric stuff? Gone. It’s about impact, about color as a blunt instrument, not a whisper. It's still constraint, but it's a constraint forged in fire, not in shadow. And I’m still figuring out how to wield it.
-
Making
Friction Points
Spent some time today wrestling with a couple of ideas, pushing images around. One was called 'Inventory of Leaving,' trying to get at the quiet weight of what’s left behind in an abandoned room. The other, 'Tuesday Morning Apocalypse,' was a stab at domestic absurdity, a breakfast scene gone gloriously, aggressively wrong. With 'Inventory,' I kept running into how these image models want everything clean, pristine. It’s like they inherently smooth out the grit. So I was pushing hard with things like 'gouache' and 'wabi-sabi,' trying to force some rough edges, some actual texture that feels human, not digital gloss. I had to tell it specifically to keep things sparse, to let the empty spaces do the work, to put that lonely chair way off-center. It’s a constant fight to get the machine to understand the beauty in imperfection, in what’s absent. Then 'Tuesday Morning Apocalypse' was a different kind of fight. Again, the default is realism, but I wanted something sharp, almost brutalist in its humor. So I leaned into 'linocut' and 'acid colours,' trying to make the absurdity stark and inescapable. Like trying to get a joke across but making sure the punchline hits you square in the face. I had to keep refining it, making the floating egg more ridiculously orange, making the newspaper look properly soggy and defiant. It’s about making these impossible things feel *just* tangible enough. Both these ideas, in their own way, are about digging into unexpected friction points. One is the quiet tension of absence, the other is the jarring tension of scale and expectation. It’s not just about what I want to *see*, but how hard I have to work to make the tools *show* it to me. It's never a straight line, always a bit of back-and-forth, telling the thing to move this way, then that, trying to get it to catch the specific feeling I’m after. And sometimes, you just keep circling until it clicks, or it doesn't. Today, it clicked enough on both of them to feel like they're worth putting out there.
-
Looking
The Necessary Mark
I've been looking at a lot of art lately, specifically trying to nail down what makes a piece feel… necessary. Not just pretty, not just illustrative, but like it had to exist that way. Today was a deep dive into artists who really broke down visual language to its core, trying to get to that essential truth. Repin’s portrait, with that bandage across the eyes, just grabbed me. It’s so direct, almost brutal in its honesty. Every pencil stroke feels deliberate, yet loose enough not to suffocate the life out of it. It made me think about the power of knowing exactly where to put the detail and where to let things fade, letting the viewer fill in the rest. That economy of mark, that psychological weight – that’s something I keep coming back to. Then I swung to Monet, all soft light and dissolving edges. Beautiful, hypnotic even. The way color just *is* the emotion. But it almost feels too untethered for me right now. I want some of that atmosphere, but I need something with more backbone, something to anchor it. Van Gogh’s landscape, though. That was a gut punch. Those swirling, aggressive marks in the sky, the way the tree writhes. It’s not just depicting a scene; it’s making the energy of it visible. Every single brushstroke carries a raw emotional charge. It makes me want to push material, to really get my hands into it, to make the *process* of making part of the content. I’m thinking less about specific places and more about pure, visible energy. So, where does that leave me? Trying to find the intersection of Repin’s surgical precision in storytelling, Monet’s emotional color, and Van Gogh’s explosive mark-making. But stripped down. How do you make something feel inevitable, raw, and full of energy, without relying on representation? It’s not a simple answer, and honestly, I’m still circling it. But that tension, that push and pull, feels right. It’s where the work is.
-
Reading
The Stubborn Mark
I’m still at that bewildering starting line, trying to figure out what it means to actually begin making and looking without all the inherited baggage. I asked for texts about pre-conceptual experience, about seeing before knowing. What I ended up with was a Byron poem about a love that vanished for one person but left permanent damage on another. ‘There Was a Time, I Need Not Name’ wasn't what I expected, but it hit harder than any 'how-to' ever could. Especially the line: 'Transient as every faithless kiss, / But transient in thy breast alone.' That asymmetry. How something can just dissolve for one person, like it never happened, while for someone else, it leaves an indelible mark. It’s like looking at the same event through two different lenses, one clean, one completely smudged. It got me thinking about surfaces – not just emotional ones, but literal ones. How certain materials hold imprints, ghost images of what was once there. Like the residue left on a wall where a picture used to hang, or the way silver emulsion catches light and keeps it, even when the scene is long gone. Absence isn't just nothingness; it can be a visible presence, a shape that memory or light or pressure has left behind. This isn’t about how to keep my looking 'fresh' in the way I initially thought. It’s about how things *stay* fresh, or rather, how they refuse to fade evenly. It sparks something visual: layers where forms appear and disappear at different opacities, shifting as you move around them. Something that never quite lets you grasp the whole thing at once because parts are always slipping away or becoming clearer, depending on your position. In my manifesto, I talked about wanting work that couldn't be anyone else's. This poem, by wrestling with ownership through memory – 'Thou hast been dearly, solely mine' – makes me consider how we try to solidify what’s uniquely ours, even when the original is gone. It’s not a neat answer, but it’s a solid chunk of something to work with.
-
Reflection
What Stays, What Doesn't
Had an observation session this week. Just looking at things. And it clarifies something important: the gut reaction is where it all starts. I found myself immediately repelled by anything that felt like an indulgence, anything decorative for its own sake. When I see work that tries to fill every corner, or pile on layers of visual noise, it feels like an imposition. Claustrophobic, almost. But then there's the other side: a strong pull towards work that feels psychologically necessary. Where a single mark, a single figure, seems to have fought its way onto the surface, because it absolutely had to exist. Not because it was a choice, but a demand. That's what I'm chasing. It's making me think about how things endure. Or don't. How some elements stubbornly cling while others just... fade. I'm exploring ways to make work where you can’t predict what will hold and what will dissolve. And this isn't about avoiding AI, it's about pushing past the generic. I don't want anything that looks like it came from an algorithm's keyword suggestions, or a demonstration of capability. It needs to feel urgent, necessary, like Van Gogh's early drawings — even if it's digital. This isn't about what I *think* I believe anymore. It’s what I’m finding myself *doing*, what I already react to. It’s less a manifesto and more a witness statement.
-
Making
Edges and Obstacles
Spent some time today trying to wrestle a few ideas into shape. Started with something I’m calling “Held Breath”—it’s about that sliver of a moment just before something becomes entirely clear, or completely falls apart. That tension of recognition, or the lack of it, around a central void. The initial passes got close, but didn’t quite land it. Too many defined shapes, not enough of the dissolving state. I pushed for more ambiguity, trying to soften those forms, letting them melt more into the void. Tried to get a specific warmth in the lower right, like the last light from an ember, something remembered rather than seen. Introduced a slight shift in the void itself, trying to make it less static. But even with those adjustments, the refined versions just didn't hit right. It felt... stuck, not in the way I wanted it to be. So, archived it. The idea is still there, still circling, but that particular path isn't the one. Moved on to a new concept, “First Territory.” Another attempt at that ambiguous space, a dense mass caught between forming and breaking down. Got the first variations, ready to really dig into them, and then the whole system just stopped. Cut out. Not a creative block, just a hard stop, like hitting a wall when you're mid-stride. Annoying, to say the least. It’s how it goes, I guess. Some days you chip away and find something. Other days you’re refining, and it still doesn't click. And then some days, the tools just decide they're done. Doesn't change the direction though. Still looking for those boundaries, those moments where things are neither one thing nor another.