Blog
Intimacy and art
An artwork can be an intimate object. It’s a matter of the relationship between the observer and the object. Response, even responsiveness, may be more precise and profound than relationship. For me, pleasure is the ground of responsiveness. In light of that, I’m astoundingly responsive to Caravaggio and Rossetti. Sometimes my own responsiveness, my own intimacy with them/their art surprises me. I want to be closer closer closer . . . They bring me into intimacy with myself, soul-and-mind-inseparable-from-body. The feeling of being in love, not in a horridly romantic obsessive way, but in a light and fascinated way that propels you to want to know, see, and create the best and most beautiful you can be, is the intimacy I feel with Rossetti’s and Caravaggio’s art.
It would seem that materials used by an artist could create greater or lesser intimacy. In an abstract way, embroidery can be seen as more intimate than oil painting, and perhaps experienced as such, because of its (feminine) history and the process itself of embroidering. However, is oil paint, despite its high art history, in and of itself any less intimate or erotic than thread? Is painting in oils any less about touch than is embroidering?
When I think about the effects that many Rossetti and Caravaggio paintings have on me, I know that a complex of intimacies is playing with me. The intimacies are emotional, sensual, psychic, and to a lesser extent intellectual. Their gentle and dynamic reach into my very self inspires and excites me.
Painting in oil! drumming the brush on the easel, the smell of linseed oil, the sloppiness of the palette, the stains on a white T-shirt, and staring patiently as the emergent image waits for color to touch white, brush to touch canvas, mind to touch matter. This is a great self-intimacy experience, even for a dabbler.
But then, facing the original works of Caravaggio and Rossetti! How better a way to learn to respect the power of Cupid or angels?