I’ve been reading Emily Carr’s journals. For those of you who don’t know, she was a Canadian painter from Victoria who lived in the early 1900’s. Although she constantly criticizes herself about not being scholarly and well trained, she clearly was inquisitive and bright,. She was an astute observer of nature and people. With fascinating observations on people and some great tidbits on painting. She lead what she refers to as a solitary life with her dogs, a rat and a monkey! Also had two sisters and tenants who rented out a part of her house. Saw the world through a religious lens and was always striving to represent this greater world in her paintings. She was a constant immersive in nature, and had stints painting alone with her animals in a caravan. Here are some quotes from her book:
On the meaning of a painting:
“A picture does not want to be a design no matter how lovely. A picture is an expressed thought for the soul. A design is a pleasing arrangement of form and colour for the eye.”
I often marvel at the ability of music to overwhelm you. A song can make you break down and cry, and this is something I strive to bring into my paintings; a raw emotional connection to a scene. So I found it interesting that Emily Carr remarked on a comparison between music and painting:
“Lizzie, Alice and I went to hear the Seattle Symphony. First time in years we have been out together. It was delightful as we sat there unanimously enjoying it. I couldn’t help wondering why it was that we could all meet and be lifted up in the music while had it been a picture exhibit we’d have had no shared sympathy at all. Has music something art lacks? The new art does lift one but so few understand. They refuse to be lifted. They will not go beyond the outer shell. They want the surface representation; the soul behind it they do not want and cannot feel. Surely we artists must fail some-where. Why can’t we lift the veil and reveal the soul if the musician can? Is the eye more earthy than the ear?”