By Nancy Natale
Recently I was invited to show at a local gallery near my home in Easthampton in Western Massachusetts. The gallery owner left up to me what type of exhibition I wanted, and I decided to invite Sharon Ligorner, another artist from my town, who also works in encaustic, to show with me. I thought our work complemented each other's because while we both worked in an abstract geometric mode, Sharon's work is much more curvilinear and expressive than mine and provided a balance to my straight lines and rectilinear forms.
Sharon Ligorner, Diversity, 2016, gouache and encaustic, 24 x 24 inches
Nancy Natale, In the Rough, 2017, encaustic and mixed media, 16 x 16 inches
I took charge of the listing in the Valley Arts Newsletter,
a weekly online publication advertising visual and performing arts in the area.
Although I was limited to only 500 characters including spaces, I managed to
combine both our viewpoints:
An Unwelcome Surprise
Despite my providing the gallery with the aforementioned statement along with our brief separate statements,
to my horror the gallery promoted the show quite differently:
Nancy
Natale and Sharon Ligorner have at least one thing in common: wax. Their
medium of predilection is encaustic painting. This artform is relatively
unknown but certainly not new: The oldest surviving encaustic
panel paintings are the Romano-Egyptian Fayum mummy portraits from
the 1st Century BC.
Encaustic
art has seen a resurgence in popularity since the 1990s with people using
electric irons, hotplates and heated styli on different surfaces (thank you
Wikipedia!).
Whether
you are familiar with encaustic art or not, we invite you to discover how
Sharon and Nancy use that same medium to create their own unique artwork.
My Response
I immediately wrote an email to the gallery owner, Jean-Pierre Pasche, a very nice guy who had good intentions but didn't understand what was at stake. Here's what I said after being somewhat apologetic for having to write:
The
description "encaustic art" is a very limiting and even ghettoizing
term for art made using this medium. It reduces the work to just its medium and
takes away from the unique use by individual artists. In other words, it
detracts from the artists' intention in making the work. Would you describe oil
paintings as "oil art" or works in acrylic as "acrylic
art?" In some respects, the medium is the least important part of a painting.
Do you see what I mean?
Encaustic
is just one of the mediums in which we work, the way acrylic or oil or
watercolor would be. The commonality in Sharon's and my work is geometry and
the way we use it to make paintings.
This
is a somewhat sensitive subject for me because along with the renewed
popularity of encaustic has come a plague of hobbyists who just want to
"play with wax." In some areas of the art world, this has caused
works in encaustic to be regarded as inferior, too delicate to be sold, art
that is not collectible in the same way as that in other mediums. You wouldn't believe
the incredible messes made in the name of "encaustic art."
Sharon
and I are professional artists who have been painting for years. The work we
make could have been executed in any medium, but we chose encaustic because of
its additional unique qualities.
Installation views at Elusie Gallery, Easthampton, Massachusetts
Above: Sharon Ligorner, D'Art Board; encaustic, gouache, and pencil, 24 x 24 inches; Good Fortune, encaustic, 12 x 12 inches; Sun Parade, encaustic, 12 x 18 inches; all 2017
Below: Nancy Natale, Red Blast, 24 x 24 inches; In the Rough, 16 x 16 inches; Googly Dots (top) and Blue Moons, both 12 x 12 inches; all 2017, encaustic and mixed media
Above: Sharon Ligorner, D'Art Board; encaustic, gouache, and pencil, 24 x 24 inches; Good Fortune, encaustic, 12 x 12 inches; Sun Parade, encaustic, 12 x 18 inches; all 2017
Below: Nancy Natale, Red Blast, 24 x 24 inches; In the Rough, 16 x 16 inches; Googly Dots (top) and Blue Moons, both 12 x 12 inches; all 2017, encaustic and mixed media
A Resolution
The gallery owner understood and said he would not advertise the show that
way any longer.
Perhaps he thought that I was being overly sensitive, but
then he heard from two of his patrons that their impression of paintings made
with encaustic had been based on the drippy, smeary, playing-with-wax paintings
they had seen previously. The works in our show contradicted that impression. In a conversation I had at the opening reception with
one of these patrons, an architectural color consultant and interior decorator,
she expressed her astonishment at the amount of "control" that Sharon
and I showed over the medium. She was stunned to think that her opinion of work
in encaustic had been so far off track because of what she had seen from the melt-and-drip
practitioners.
This experience has shown me I can't assume that someone writing promotional
statements about a show will understand that the work is not about the medium.
It must be explicitly stated that the medium is a means to an end and that the
term "encaustic art" is not appropriate in any description because it
diminishes the work.
The term “encaustic art” does irreparable damage to those of us
working professionally in the medium. I know that some artists (including
ProWax members) refuse to even use the word "encaustic" because of
its connotations, but we shouldn't shy away from the word just as other artists wouldn't shy away from "oil" or "acrylic." We choose encaustic because it has inherent qualities that allow us to make the
work we want to see and to express the ideas we want to express. But to be clear: When we're describing our art, we don't need "encaustic" as the adjective.
. . . . . . . .
Nancy Natale is the executive editor of ProWax Journal
Click "Older Posts" bottom right to continue with the issue
Yahoo, Nancy. Well said. Love the notion that “we don’t need “encaustic” as the adjective. It is all about the message and not the medium.
ReplyDeleteExcellent Nancy...I in most recent months(or this last year at least) have described my own work as beeswax,resin and pigmet on panel..or wax and pigment monotype and/or print whichever the case may be for this very same reason.. and as my own practice has developed I am more interested in the intention behind the work then advertising the medium..thanks for sharing your take on this matter I am glad you were able to correct it in this instance. N.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I think you handled it beautifully.
ReplyDelete