Virtual Inception

Hibernating in an undefined space for a long period of 9 years, the art teacher suddenly awakes to a whole world of changes...virtual space has become real for any ordinary person in the street with just a handphone in hand. So, what can the teacher do? Still talk about art?

mental seeing and the personal space

Mental seeing to many people simply means visualising. But, there can be more.

When I draw and write (or calligraph), I see myself living in the past and --- living in the future.

Nothing new?
The important point here is, one got to feel it or better sense it.

It's only then that one can create that wanted space with time. In a personal way.

Then again, do not mix this process with the virtual world in the net for the internet is not a personal environment.

Seeing and Creating, which is first?

Seeing space and creating space are two inseparable activities to an landscape artist. Yet, some time ago, critics tore them apart just 'to be precise'.

They said seeing, then conceptualising and finally producing a space (the artwork) was copying the real(-ism).

In parallel, conceptualising, then producing and finally seeing was expression(-ism).

Realism vs Expressionism? Why?

If I didn't see these real tree barks, could I conceptualise anything?

The natural texture of the barks gives the quality of rugged terrain for my mountains. So, I'm not just copying but importing (using) the barks directly. So, is this realism?

On the other hand, as a landscape painter, if I did't think of finding some material to better enhance the textural effect of my imaginery mountains would I go out to look for the barks?

My imagination/expression came first, yes?

So, what do you think of my works?

I See Movement

Halloween brought me another fun.

As I washed the pumkin seeds in a pot they formed certain pattern. Fierce stirring in one direction caused them to 'swim' upright producing momentary short lines forming a whirpool pattern that was playing trick on my eyes.

I caught it to show you. Can you see what I see?

Can one see time?

During the Halloween, no one could miss out the Jacko Lantern and the fun in making one of it. It's a craft no doubt. But I call it---- the form of time.

First, it symbolises a festival near the end of the year. Second, one has to know when is the right time to make it. Third, it changes everyday (after its creation). Fourth, one needs to photo it everyday to document the changes.

Jacko is bright for only one day. It is not a ceramic work that can last. And so, the form degrades very fast. Jacko can only tell the time for six days and by the seventh, it collapses into a pool of yellow paste.

So, can you see what I see? Do I kill your romance with Halloween? Pardon me if I do.

Seeing horizontally seeing vertically

A recent trip to Gua Musang, in the middle of Pahang jungle (West Malaysia), allows me to see 'very horizontally'. That really means ten to twenty kilometres of space because of these scattered protruding limestone hills. Yet, one would feel dwarfed when standing at the base of such tall and magnificent creation of mother nature.
So, there is really a limitation to our seeing.

Only the artist can help foreshorten this twenty kilometre of sight and space.

Seeing upside down 2 (acrylic/chalk/tree bark)

Seriously, what do your eyes say about this piece of work?

Hmm, an interesting landscape?
A more unique perspective?
What a sense of texture?
Is it real?
or abstract?

Well, that 'feel' you may have is real
but the visual is an accident.

One day, while cycling in the park, I came upon some fallen tree barks. After some hesitation, I took them back for my latest landscape creation.
I saw the barks, arranged and rearranged. Then painted the distant perspective.I wanted to capture that 'feel' I had at the pai yun ting in the yellow mountain (china).
So, the barks, with textural pattern, turn into rugged rock surface. That piece of huge rock at the bottom left (of the previous entry, dated 24 Jan) is where visitors stand and the moving mist/cloud just split into two directions.

Yes, I'm talking about the previous work because that was the original creation. But before I glued the barks, I turned the painted landscape upside down.
I had a totally different feel -- this one here.

Do you feel or see what I feel and see?

Seeing upside down (acrylic/chalk/tree bark)

I like this latest creation.
It is impressionistic.
It gives mood to space.

It is a painting.
It is a mixed media.
It is a relief.
It is an accident

that I love to encounter.

Can you see (that accident)?

No, you cannot.

Seeing into the 'Box'

It is so frequent to hear people saying 'think out of the box'. Then you may wonder where those thinkers go after they manage to get out of their boxes.

Do they land on something sound and good? or, are they perpetually hopping and groping around?

Then again, if you take that as one of the process (or step) in creative problem solving, shouldn't one, at times, 'see' into the box to be relevant?

Afterall, whether you confine your art making within a little seal stone or running all over a building to paint the walls, you are talking about just different 'containers'. In simple, one may need to 'think in' after 'think out'; 'look in' after look out'. So, seeing into the box please and make sure you are not distracted.

Artistic Creation (acrylic)

Nowadays there are many people talking about creativity (some are being addressed as masters)
-- very few of these standing on stage are visual artists

Yet, for centuries, discussions on creative trend, philosophy of art or philosophy of aesthetics are centred around visual art or artworks

Why so?

because art is very subjective?
because art is only in the eye of the beholder?

whereas creativity is in everyone?
can be unlock?
can be practised?
can be put into good use?
can earn you a fortune?

What do you see?

Seeing Through

This painting was done by applying colours to both front and back of the rice paper
It is a good practice for gongbi hua style

But can you see through it after it is being framed?
Anyway, do you bother with 'things' you cannot see?

I was very disturbed by someone at Linz's alittlebeijing exhibition because he 'see through' the effort in publishing the 60 + 1 travel guide and only admired at the structure I was trying to fix up

Worst of all, he asked me very seriously, "What concept is this (that structure)?" .....Huh?

What the fish (See like a Fish)

What fishes are these?

Look funny if your eyes are for something more technical like what species they are

But you are invited to swim as one of them and see its direction
Dash in and out of the weed and enjoy your freedom

What do you think now?

Which fish is you?

Who choose to see

A group of old friends visited me recently after a lap of ten years. Seeing my landscape paintings, they laughed and declared "How can Singapore scenery be so beautiful? You are imagining! It's not real!"

My reply was
"Go ahead and laugh!"
"... but did you really see what is there in Singapore?"
"...YGWYS... or YSWYG?"


But these friends are professional people
...who are definitely very selective people
...who choose to see what they want to see

...may not be aesthetics

Do we see the same 2 (acrylic)

Similarly, what title would you give to this work?

Gender related?
Culture related?
Object related?

Personal experience?
Traditional baggage?
Environmental constraint?

Social concern?
Relationship?
Self-expression?

Or, may be,
just talk about the process in making this artwork?

Do we see the same (acrylic)

If this work is going to be experimental, what do you see? What can you add? Where is it going to be added?

Having spent half a year intentionally reading up all the art books I have, both the East and the West, I see big gap in the sharing of art among cultures. Why?

So I ask, Is there really an intention to communicate?

Way of Seeing (acrylic)

It is not easy to trust aesthetics in term of elements of art and design principles because many try to interpret beyond them.

So they say that everyone has a different way of seeing. Actually, it could be that everyone has a different way of thinking.
Sometimes, it is quite straight forward to see. Especially a pair of critical eyes.

But not the mind. Everyone would try to describe, then analyse, then interpret and finally pass a judgement.

The intent of the artist, again, could be missed.

Form or intent

Wu Guanzhong says that the capability of visual art lacks that in literature.
To him, literature is born out of critical thinking while visual art is preoccupied in technique.
Though he is speaking from a far distant place, that observation seems to be omnipresent here, where I live.

Why are people more concern with the form -- the approach, the style -- than the intent of making an artwork?

The unfortunate outcome is, people would excuse -- 'another mountain', 'another bird' or 'another abstract' -- as long as the artist can produce an exciting style. If possible, a style that is trend setting.

So often the critical artist's intent is dismissed -- oh! that real/true creation.


What is the bird thinking behind the pot?

Sementics of art (watercolour)

Time is not an element of art yet artists are so concern with experience in the past, present and possible future. Some exploit the colour element with rhythm, movement or repeated pattern. Others would create lines and modulated strokes to simulate the flight of time. In anyway, they turn out to be abstracts.
My concern is, why are artists giving up the subject itself, like a clock that shows time, like the moving shadow casted by the strong sunlight. That still-life could be a better 'sementics' of art.

Moving faster than the Bird (watercolour)

Mass Rapid Transit has run all over the island. When it is across the reservoir where I live, one can look out to see birds moving backward. If I were the bird I would ask,"Why are these people moving so fast?"
For what, really?
For what I know, aesthetics is brushed aside most of the time -- for a living.

Beyond the Last Mountain

Many have the opinion that chinese paintings are highly imaginative implying that there is a lack of observation or outdoor research of the physical world.
Otherwise, they feel that these works do not comply with their established understanding of aesthetics.

Alas, many do not have the opportunity to see original or printed good work of masters to counter-check those opinion.

Unfortunately, many are seeing (and we like to say, seeing is to believe) the works of the last two to three hundred years (late Ching Dynasty). Those are inferior, in concept and technique, to much earlier works in the Song Dynasty or even early-Ching. Many were just copied. Copied through individuals' memories because duplicates were not available then.

On another hand, if a good work is imaginative, I think it is the creativity of the master to symbolise, to plan and layout his work so that the onlooker would be conveniently invited to travel with him, not in time, but at least in space. All in relativity. I admire those early artists' appreciation of 3D space when science was not available then.