Looking at a piece of art, we view it through the lens of what we know. One thing we know about is the physical world in which we live. We understand subconsciously what gravity means in our world. We know how some things should look and interact because we live in ever changing compositions in a world dominated by gravity.
Since about 1980, my work relates to this idea about gravity. The compositions are always heavier feeling at the bottom because of color choice or number and size of shapes. It lives up to an expectation, when thinking about balance in a composition, and the piece does not have to fight a battle to stay alive.
That is not to say that a piece where the opposite is true cannot be equally satisfying. That’s the thing about art. There are often bad solutions to true questions that can be the most amazing visually. Or the opposite. The deeper one gets into any discipline, the expansion of those gray areas as opposed to the black and white ones can create insanity in the most superficial of workers.
Since teaching design in the last decade, I have wanted to make thinly orchestrated compositions. The move is also due to the extreme amount of work necessary when stitching work in the past. I am past that! Below is a piece which adheres to my “darker shapes at the bottom” rule.
In spare work, the elements are all very important because there are so few of them.
Comparing the two views of the sculptural piece above, I have questions. Which composition is better, the first where the front window is parallel to the floor, or the second, where the back window is?