The strength and common thread through all of their writings has been the search for self and the attention to symbols for self knowing. Little by little, I turn further toward the importance of symbols in dreams, journaling and relationships, and my art becomes a more overt conduit for depicting and understanding those symbols. The critical thinking that takes shape through meditation (through art making) on a symbol or symbolic image is, what I'll now call (thanks Jung), alchemical. As in meditation, this thinking is non linear, abstract and holistic, but instead of using the process to check out, it seems there is an opportunity to check in. Over the years, my inability to intelligently express abstract ideas through verbal language played into a weakness of mine - fear of fraudulence and stupidity. In lieu of depicting what is bizarre, raw, abstract or confusing from my creative mind, I have protected myself (checked out) through organizing my art within public comfort zones, thus avoiding putting tender vulnerability on the "chopping block." To be honest, I think higher Ed for artists should specifically address and engage (check in) with this vulnerability, abstraction and confusion as much or MORE than it stresses professionalism and competitive, art-market stuff. So, being that I don't currently participate in the art market, who's doing the "chopping?" Inevitably, myself. And I'll say, I don't believe that my work up until the recent past was shallow or less important. There were courageous and bold efforts, personal expression and worthwhile risks to be applauded. I am especially glad to have made artwork with and for a dance company, made large, site specific installations, and to have learned to take A LOT of time on projects instead of pressuring myself to be prolifically productive. The difference then was that, even though the natural symbols and effects of myself came through in my projects, I wanted to express ideas that were related to life outside of me. Perhaps that was the framework for my art that seemed necessary in order to talk about it and share it with people, relating to what is more conventionally understood. I believe many of those works started as the more cryptic and personal visual language of my own ways and being. Then, much of the project was steered by my impressions of public perception and acceptance, leaving the initial abstract vision to be reformed and polished (Errr... chopped).
Depicting abstract symbols of my psyche felt awkward and exposed. Does this relate to a college art critique wherein a peer student mocked my symbolic artwork (or so I thought he mocked my work)? I think that moment indicated to me that not only was I "weird" outside of the art world, but even amongst peers I was weird, and that felt like a chopping block. That moment did not end badly, my other peers and my professors weren't addressing my work that way, but, it did provoke a paranoia in me. I have always picked up on the comments and critiques of "art professionals" and I have been hung in the balance of "is it too weird?" "Is it weird enough?" and "Will they like it?"
In contrast, Nikki Giovanni teaches her students to ask a question more like, "Do I like it and is it good enough for me?"
The superego-boombox that I have long shouldered adopted that self-conscious and insecure perspective that tells you that others' impressions of your work come first and your personal journey is submissive to it. If others saw my work as weird or confusing, then I had to make my work more understandable or just minimal in aesthetic so that there were few overt symbolic messages. (I do love minimalism and my most minimal art has been a great relief and comfort to me.) If someone whom I respected as an artist/art professional made a dismissive remark regarding some symbol or symbolic imagery that feels important to me, I would adopt that dismissive thinking and the superego would remark, "yes, now you know where to draw the line with your vulnerability."
An artist peer of mine once groaned, "Ugh! Self portraits!" with a grossed out expression. I have no idea why she would be dismissive and repulsed by self portraiture - perhaps it is too often a mode of self expression which is difficult to face? At that time, I was courageously making more self portraits, including much symbolism otherwise, and I immediately felt I had to keep my current work "mum." Thankfully, I did not keep mum beyond our conversation, but her words and expression goaded me, confirming my Superego's fearful message, "yes, keep it to yourself."
 |
| This was my first artwork after chaos time (see below), also a first effort at grandly portraying personal symbolism. |
Chaotic events occurred in my life (yes, chaos, like murder and death), which brought me to the bottom and to the darkest place. In that depth I realized, there's no time to lose, there's no other life to live, there's no need to succumb to any program for life other than my own intuitive and real desires. Making my artwork can and does reflect all of this.
Carl Jung points out that when we shine a light onto our shadow, we find darkness, and that is rightfully so.
Ever since (what I've usually called) the chaos time, there has been a slow, subversive energy and thought process that has recently become more the leader as I engage life and art. I've learned to temper the superego with intuition and allow abstract thinking/feeling it's rightful role in my art making. Symbolism, which has always been apparent to me, even when suppressed or confusing, now regains it's rightful role in my art-making and in my self-making.
 |
| A very recent watercolor/drawing, an effort to play into the stream of consciousness and allow whatever comes up. Much like dream analysis, I can look at the image after the fact and see or follow clues from the subconscious mind. |
