The Genuine Article

            I recently attended the Western Spirit Art Show at the Cheyenne Frontier Days Old West Museum.   With 150 artists from across the nation depicting the theme in over 300 pieces, it's a good place to see what's happening in contemporary western art.   I saw a range of work, from a little sculpture made of shirt collars to more standard western paintings.  Photography was included as a medium this year, and one had to look carefully to differentiate some of the photorealistic paintings from altered photos.  I heard someone say, "I already have a camera." 

            This got me thinking about western art, and how, in spite of that viewer's comment, the general public values art that looks like a photo.  Last year Rose Fredrick, curator of the prestigious Coors Show at Denver's National Western Stock Show, spoke at the Western Spirit Conference.  She told of the majority of Coors show viewers flocking to photorealistic paintings, walking by glorious, more abstracted works.  Her key point was to keep your art "your own," no matter what attracts the masses.  This Frederickson illustrated with a story about an accomplished artist who'd submitted a painting of a bucking horse to the Coors Show, thinking it was what they wanted.  The painting was a failure, as it betrayed the artist's authenticity, proving she knew nothing about horses or rodeo.   When asked to submit her usual, non-representational art, the artist's work was accepted to the show. 

            Authenticity is crucial in art, but where does it come from?  Understandably, most western art viewers validate art by its maker's skill in creating a life-like representation.  One presenter this year showed us photos of her ranching ancestors to validate her conceptual art.  Some artists qualify their work with their appearance or erudite explanations.  I don't want to put on my boots, nor give a wordy discourse, nor paint photo-realistically to prove I know cows.  I don't believe we artists want to prove anything; we want our art to speak for itself and to communicate with viewers. Our words should enhance, not prove its validity.  We shouldn't change our art to conform to what the general public (or a juror) likes.  If you remain true to yourself, your art will be authentic and it will find a following (think of Van Gogh), no matter which style expresses your ideas.  Think of what you consider "bad art," and you'll see that it has an audience, even if you're not among its fans. 

            My biggest compliment at this year's show was when a juror told me I was a "freak," adding that I (and a few others there) "don't conform to trends in contemporary western art."  This meant a lot to me.  Though it's impossible not to be influenced by other artists, in keeping our work genuinely "our own," regardless of where it lies on the range between photorealist and non-objective and in spite of which trends are driving the market, we give up much of the need to authenticate it. 

Sonja Caywood ©March 2014