Today has been about going on a walk and considering the experience of the walk. Being in the moment, listening and allowing happenings... alchemy. In parallel to this activity, I am listening to the podcast interview of Crowley. The summary of his Podcast and core points have led me to explore how I want to use the visual alnguage. For Crawley, the primary subject is the material itself, achieved through the core directive: "Let the paint do the work." Subject [shadpws] and object [painted object]
Crowley’s statement—‘I treat shadow as the only subject matter’— Shadow isn't merely a lack of light; it is a formal property to be constructed through the material, not just observed. Crowley discusses the subject and object of painting separately.
-
Material Action: Precisely how the paint's own properties (viscosity, thickness, opacity) are deployed to materialise shadow.
-
Decisions of Exploitation: Every moment where the paint's action was kept, leveraged, and deliberately made into a formal decision. The goal is to exploit the materials rather than tame them. I am left wondering whether visual devices and techniques are a taming shield or are the purpose.
-
Painting Language: The resulting edges, textures, and colour shifts are evidence of the painting language itself. The language is now centred on the physical manifestation of shadow as form.
Graham Crowley - Dark Arc 19 2025 - Oil on board - 24.5 x 31 cm - The painter
Indeterminacy and Emotional Discourse
The philosophical weight of the work rests on Graham Crowley's challenge to ‘Get the paint to do what only the paint can do’. That essential function is the medium's indeterminacy—its refusal to be wholly fixed or illustrative. I absolutely love the term indeterminancy. It is the secret juice for me.
-
Painting vs. Illustration: By embracing the paint's indeterminacy, the work opts for Painting—an open-ended discourse existing at the intersection of thought and matter—rather than the fixed, deterministic narrative of Illustration.
The landscape, then, becomes the site for this discourse to carry meaning.
-
The Emotional Syntax: The quote "’landscape paintings have the potential to be rather like love letters, filled with rage, passion and occasionally hope’" re-frames the genre entirely. The landscape is merely the pretext. The material’s indeterminacy is the emotional syntax that allows feelings like rage, passion, and hope to surface in a visceral, non-narrative way. The medium’s unpredictable painting language gives form to complex, highly personal internal states. This links with my thoughts on subjunctive spaces.
Current Direction: The work is a disciplined study in allowing the material to define its own logic, utilising the medium’s inherent indeterminacy as a conduit for intense emotional content, primarily by treating shadow as the central, constructed subject. The question remains - what is my subject matter? The walking activity needs to be repeated whilst holding this internal indeterminacy. I need to try to let go of visual devices and then maybe repeat this activity and embrace visual devices...
The next phase must formally develop the practical methods of engagement. This required tension between control and material freedom is already anticipated by the 'walking painting' exercise done with Dominic Shepherd. This process imposed high-pressure constraints (on time and movement) that forced an immediate reaction, allowing the painting language to emerge under pressure. This approach is key: it tested how far I can exploit the medium’s physical resistance to channel complex internal states while never abandoning the fundamental act of listening to the paint's response. I need to now formally define the rules of this specific exercise for use in the studio. I am going to repeat this on sunday at the beach.
Potential future studio question:
After every significant step or material decision, the work must be judged against Crowley’s simple query: ‘Did it just get more complicated, better or different’? The goal is always to achieve "better" or critically "different," and avoid merely "complicated."
Reflection Prompt:
To what extent are things apparent but not present in my work?
