One cannot accomplish with words the exact message expressed through visual form. One may read book after book about Leonardo and his famous "Mona Lisa" in detail, but the feeling one gets when observing the painting itself is markedly different. The verbal (logical) and visual (sensory) are two distinct arenas, and each possesses it's own mode of expression. An understanding & appreciation of how both modes of thought function in relation to art will assist the viewer when considering content.

When confronted with something that seems beyond logic, or beyond words, we often dismiss it, treating it perhaps less seriously than something that conforms to conventional understanding. Sometimes we blatantly reject it. Too often this occurs when a viewer of art approaches something not immediately or easily understood. Unfortunately, this was the hostile reception Jackson Pollock received from the American public when his "drip paintings" were first exhibited. "Jack the Dripper", as he was called, initially faced considerable animosity for his artistic vision. Now he is considered a master and innovator of American Art, who influenced many artists who succeeded him. His concepts influenced painters such as Helen Frankenthaler, Morris Louis, as well as later "happenings" and performance art. His pieces influenced sculptors such as Eva Hesse, Bruce Nauman, Richard Serra, Robert Morris, Lynda Benglis and Judy Pfaff. The list goes on and on.

A visually oriented thought can initially be difficult to effectively translate into words, and vice-versa. If something cannot be verbally explained or described, it is difficult to apply our familiar standard of deductive logic or reason. There is a physiological basis for this occurrence: different areas of the brain are used to process and interpret different types of sensory input. The areas that respond most to nuances of line, shape, color and other aspects of pure form, are not the same areas used to solve a math equation or spell one's name. They are, simply, different types of thought, and each is expressed in it's own unique form.

When a viewer opens his mind and focuses primarily with his senses (including emotions), without feeling the need to rationalize his impressions or reactions, he connects to the artwork on a basic, formal level. One forms an initial connection to the work that allows for the possibility of an intimate relationship to be built. It is after the introduction and initiation to an artwork that one can begin to grasp content.

Therefore, when attempting to analyze content, it is necessary for the viewer to adapt- and tap into a mode of thinking not often used in practical everyday, decision-making matters. This isn't easy for many to do, for it takes time, practice and effort.

Sometimes viewers have raised questions when first observing my new pieces such as: "Where did you get that idea?" or "What is this all about?" or "Why did you do that?" or "What were you thinking when you made that?" (The inflection of their voices when asking such questions makes all the difference! Ha Ha!) Depending upon the piece, such inquiries are not always easy to respond to, despite the verbal acuity of the artist. There may not be a satisfactory answer that encompasses the full thought-and neither appeases the viewer or artist at that moment.

Ideas in art can be a complex, multi-leveled mélange of experiences, sensory stimuli, conscious and unconscious thoughts and memories accumulated throughout the artist's lifetime. It is often after much reflection, meditation and retrospection when a comprehensive answer to such questions can be adequately expressed. And, not only that, the idea also is intrinsically connected to and influenced by the time, place, culture, etc. in which the artist lives & participates.

"For me the great artist is a formulation of the greatest intelligence: he is the recipient of sensations which are the most delicate and consequently the most invisible expressions of the brain."

When observing an artwork that is not clearly intelligible on a basic verbal/logical level, some viewers feel stress or confusion. They may not be able to "label" or "figure out" the complexity of what it is they see and/or feel, thus they may feel impaired or cautious. It is the burden of translation--the construction of meaning. What occurs at that point can influence whether or not an individual walks away from the piece inspired and grateful or embittered and cynical.

One cannot necessarily deduce an artwork as one would a television program, advertisement or memento. When one actively becomes invested in the process, a true learning experience occurs. The piece may share with you a small idea, a life lesson, a joke, an aspect of contemporary culture, something spiritual and/or a fresh way of thinking about a subject. A different orientation is all that is needed to gain insight.

We tend to classify artworks that induce definite positive/negative responses "original", for they seem creative, "different", and even unusual. The degree of originality we assign such works is often determined by the amount of wonder they instill within us. That wonder is gained from the artist's ability to present an idea in a new, if unfamiliar, light.

"Creativity involves breaking out of established patterns in order to look at things in a different way."

For a taste of what is to come, check out their work at these locations:

http://www.assemblylanguage.com/images/Morimura1.html

http://masters-of-photography.com/S/sherman/sherman_96_full.html