About self-taught artists
, by Melanie Dumay, 2 min reading time
"As an artist he was self-taught" we read it regularly. But how objective is that? And how do you judge that then? Isn't a person and his ability and actions (and therefore also artists) always created by experiences/unconscious guidance? And therefore no longer self-taught?
By Melanie Dumay
When are you a self-taught artist?
In painting we often mention the word autodidact when describing an artist to whom it applies. But how does that work exactly, what does it say and what exactly is it?
Knowledge and guidance
If we look at the relation it has to artists, you could say that it is about acquiring knowledge without study or guidance. For artists that often meant that there was no education for it, and even is. They are sometimes called outside artists.
Is it a choice?
But actually it is not a choice; art comes from within, from an intrinsic value. Based on something you have experienced, what your fantasy tells you or what you simply want to trust to the canvas or paper. You do not need an art academy to call yourself an artist. In short: then you are self-taught. Aren't there many? Absolutely.
Knowledge....
A solid academy however teaches you as an artist to deal with perspective, techniques, skills but also knowledge of materials, and other theoretical knowledge. Of course, knowledge of art history and the movements up to now is a basic boundary to be able to place or process things as an artist in the artistry; consciously or unconsciously.
Followers and movements
In short: there are many self-taught artists, in classical art we see that many well-known and famous artists had teachers or followed in movements. Someone was always the first; the first to paint industrialization and its aftermath, or to depict the French light and the play of color or to develop from impressionism to expressionism ( because was Vincent van Gogh an impressionist or an expressionist….?). So when are you, or were they, artists without knowledge or guidance? Self-taught cannot be determined objectively; after all, without knowledge/experience/impressions no person is....
He does?
You often come across it in biographies. In this context special attention to Eef van Brakel with his own expressive style; was he really self-taught and how do we determine that?
Click here for Eef van Brakel: master in expressive colours (and self-taught?)