Fellow artist and good friend, Stevens Jay Carter, recently posited this question on the nature of observing, “The other day I was viewing the work of an artist.  As I was admiring the work I began to think to myself; is it  possible to accept my thoughts if I removed myself  from my association with this artist? What would I actually think about this work through a stranger’s eyes, unaware of the artist’s history or background!! And furthermore, is it fair to let a work and the work alone form the picture of the artist!

My thoughts were immediate.

“Conversely, can the opinion of a critic or arbiter of a work of art be judged without including such biases as “credentials” or “personality” or “sexual orientation” of that critic, whether he be of some renown for such services or merely an ordinary passersby? Schools of thought betray themselves in this argument.

“Basically, there is always more than one way to do nearly anything under the sun. So, in judging a work of art, there will be some who insist upon knowing the “artist” and others who deny the importance of such criteria.

“After all, do we need to know anything at all about the creator of the polio vaccine or the bicycle to deem worthy these works?

“And recall de Kooning, who is damned near unique in his field in appreciating the skills and artsmanship of the ordinary house painter or artisan, while most of us who posture within the art world would simply laugh at such a charming but gross sentimentality.”

Another friend and accomplished painter, Peter Harper, added these simply put, but core-seeking words, “Pablo Picasso was an asshole!!! But a great painter. He wouldn’t be my friend but I admire his work.”