Repetition: How do you know it isn't a bad habit?

Lately I've been repeating the same creative pattern.  It starts out with down time - "thinking time" - and then moves into 2 or 3 really bad paintings, followed by a "this isn't working" moment, and ends with a period of intense output of generally strong and exciting stuff.  Then back to the down time.  And the bad paintings.

For a long time I didn't realize how really bad the bad paintings were - all that time and effort and investment kind of thinking - but now I do, often enough to recognize it as an actual pattern.  Is this just a warming up period? Am I working out anything important? Or am I just mindlessly filling in shapes in a coloring book?

I have this book by Mary N. Balcomb, titled Sergei Bongart, and it's filled with Sergi-isms- capturing the distinct humor and directness of this Russian Master.  The one I've been hearing in my head lately is "Why you keep making same mistake?" It's as if an imaginary Bongart invaded my studio and is happily pointing out that I just spent four hours not really painting but indulging in some very bad habits. 

How do you know if what you are doing is part of your creative process or a habit you need to break?

As I see it, there has to be some critical thinking here - an attempt to mentor yourself when you don't have a mentor - or an imaginary Bongart - to offer a critique. 

You need to ask yourself a lot of questions.

Do I feel passionate about this or is it just fun to play with pretty colors?

Am I mimicking or exploring?  Mimicking is making duplicates of the same thing, and as Sergi is quoted as saying, "If you copy - you have two of same thing, who needs it?"  Exploring is looking for depth.

Is this something I want to do or have to do?  I often catch myself thinking I need a few more landscapes to flesh out a realism portfolio, but I'm not fully invested, emotionally, in landscapes at that moment.  If I just paint one because I "need" it there is no passion and no painting in the end, because I cut it off the stretchers and trash it.

Sometimes, though, I need to be well into a painting before I realize that a particular subject matter can't be painted in a style I am using, and I must rethink my approach.  Some compositional ideas achieve their emotional impact through technique, and - because I am still learning - the only way for me to discover this is through trial and error.  In such a case, artistic growth is the result.  And if there is no gained knowledge, then I have to seriously ask myself "Why you keep making same mistake..."

Comments

[Nate]

I cope with this by accepting the fact that, yes, there are bad paintings/pots/sculptures/etc... However, everything is a learning experience. Not everything is a piece that necessarily needs to leave the studio after the artist has learned from it. Recycling bins and bonfires are good ways to cleanse the less-than-successful physical detritus of the learning process while leaving the knowledge (and studio/gallery) uncluttered.

[david]

Lovely post. While I don't think there's an easy answer to your question, and I think it's probably different for everyone - I think there is something you can do to help yourself get some perspective on whether those less-than-awesome paintings are part of your process or a waste of time. At the end of a particularly good session of painting (I'll call it phase B) that was preceded by a bout of frustratingly dissatisfying paintings (I'll call it phase A), compare the work from phase B to your previous phase B works. Have you improved, changed, or grown from one high-point to the next? If so, look at the ways you've grown, and try to determine if the phase A work you did is in any way related to that growth. Did you sort out a composition idea, or paint mixing method, or even find something you needed to eliminate, while working through the phase A works that ultimately informed and improved your phase B work? If yes, then I'd say it's worth it. You're growing during phase A, and really getting into the flow in phase B.

Also, something that might be useful reading on this subject is Flow by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (http://www.amazon.com/dp/0061339202/) I've only read parts of it but it seems to touch on this subject.

[Ruth Andre]

Sue, You have sent out a very good question. How marvelous it is when the painting at hand is flowing and how miserable it is when you feel the struggle and then the do I scrape or move through this one? It is like being derailed. You have brought to the front a lot to think about.

[Peggy Guichu]

Please excuse my lack of editing. I meant to say "or bad paintings" not "are".

[Peggy Guichu]

It is my opinion that there are no mistakes are bad paintings. Perhaps it's the practice of the stroke or thought that you need to build the one painting that gives you the most joy.

Also, I have to say that the paintings that I have sold are usually not what I would call "my most significant" work. That's a disappointment and confusion to me.

[Daniel Sroka]

I work in a similar pattern: periods of creative struggle and sub-par output, that culminate (if I'm lucky) in some intensively creative sessions.

But I believe that this pattern is crucial to my creative process. I feel that my best work is the result of all those hours/days/weeks slogging through the muck. The bad work is a sign that what I am trying to create is something of value - it is not easy, just there for the taking.

[Sue Smith]

Maybe its that old chicken or the egg argument - does the preliminary work lead to the passion or impede it?

-------Original Message-------

[Fiona Purdy]

Sue - could it be that rather than take the time to sit down and think & brainstorm about the next painting you are passionate to create - you feel the need to not "waste" the time and fill it by creating work you do not feel passionate about?

[Ho]

I think reading helps in art creativity, for me at least