September / October blog for Whidbey Island FAS

Teresa Oaxaco will be doing a workshop at Whidbey Island Fine Art Studio in 2015.

“My work is about pleasing the eye. I paint light and the way it falls. Simple observation reveals beauty; often it is found in the unconventional. Because of this I have learned to take particular delight in unusual pairings of subject matter. Frequently my compositions are spontaneous. When a person comes to me, they occupy a space my mind. Arrangements form from there until with excitement I see and have the idea. The design is both planned and subconscious. For this reason I surround myself with Victorian and Baroque costume, bones, and other things which I find fascinating- I want subject matter to always be at hand.

My paintings are created with oil paint on canvas. I am conscious of the traditional craftsmanship I have attained in Florence. While my interest in new pigments and tools may cause minor alterations in my materials, these really remain fundamentally the same. All my evolution is taking place on the canvas and in my head; in what I see in nature and interpret in two dimensions on the picture plan. I have the fundamentals of design to work with when planning a painting. I make preparatory studies. I use multiple layers to build an illusion of light and form. When this illusion is convincing and to my taste, the painting is done.”

Teresa graduated at The Florence Academy of Art in 2010. Also was Life Drawing Instructor during that academic year.

Interview with Teresa some years ago.

Only Teresa Oaxaca could pull off this photo. She’s dolled up in  Victorian grandeur like a character that should have stolen the roles of Alice in Wonderland and Kirsten Dunst’s Claudia in Interview with the Vampire right out from under their  boring blond noses. Teresa’s sitting under a portrait of a somber girl with her hands folded praying to an unknown deity with a displaced tea set on the floor. She’s also holding a rat.

We talk to Teresa about her art, her Victorian era bodices, the Capuchin Crypt and vestigial tails.

1. What is your artistic background?

I started sculpting when I was pretty young. I had private instructors when my family moved to the Netherlands from 1996-1998. I went to school as soon as I could at the age of 17 (2005) in Florence, Italy. Everything I have accomplished so far would have been impossible without the training I received there – I am very influenced by the history of European painting, sculpture, and architecture.

2. Explain your spontaneous process.

Frequently my compositions are spontaneous. When a person comes to me, they occupy a space my mind. Arrangements form from there until with excitement I see and have the idea. The design is both planned and subconscious. Simple observation reveals beauty; often it is found in the unconventional. Because of this I have learned to take particular delight in unusual pairings of subject matter.

3. How would you define your style and its connection with your art?

The history of costume has been ever changing. I like to “cherry pick” from history, to take ideas from my travels and from books. I own a few authentic Victorian Era bodices however most of my clothes are modern reproductions or dresses inspired by past fashions. My clothing, like my painting technique, is heavily indebted to the past.

4. Tell us the inspiration and process behind one of your favorite pieces.

In “Remembrance,” Walter is the name of the skull in the painting. I bought it in Florence. When in Italy I visited the Capuchin Crypt. Since visiting this tunnel of death, it has recurred in my dreams and what was once a curiosity is an ominous memory…the small and yellowed skull, missing all but two teeth, utterly devoid of the occidentals and parietals is Walter… and like an old friend, I cannot keep it from my mind for long. Walter sits on your shelf; you dare him to make another appearance in one more painting.

5. What are your artistic stimuli?

I surround myself with Victorian and Baroque costume, bones…I ordered a few books on carousel horses and gothic art. Lately I have been interested in frame building and design. I think it is a shame that painting has distanced itself so far from architecture and sculpture to the point where it nearly becomes lumped in with photography. I like to think of modern wooden frames as “vestigial tails – leftovers from the days when a painting was made for an alter niche, and adorned with carved figures and intricate patterns of architecture.

for more details visit  http://www.teresaoaxaca.com

file:///Users/caryjurriaans/Desktop/Wig-Portrait3.jpg

Redefining Realsime by--Allison Allison Malafronte (senior editor of American Artist)

http://www.artistdaily.com/

Attempting to define realism or to clarify the various styles of representational painting can be a challenging task.  When writing about today's painters, I always hesitate to use words like "classical," "realist," "contemporary," "traditional," or "modern" because they do not always fully capture what I'm trying to describe. For example, a word like "classical" by definition refers to Greco-Roman or Renaissance ideals, but by connotation has come to mean an art form that embodies a certain timelessness and order. "Contemporary" undoubtedly means anything taking place in our time, so by that definition any painter alive is contemporary. But critically speaking, I would not call all painters today contemporary--I'm more apt to use that distinction when a painting has a more modern or conceptual feel.

The Desperate Man by Gustave Courbet, 1844-1845, oil painting, 17 3/4 x 21 5/8.

Artists themselves have felt the confusion and in an attempt to bring clarity have adopted such labels as new realists, figurative realists, classical realists, contemporary realists, and so on. These phrases have found their meaning in a Post-Modern context, which generally defines what it is by comparing itself to what it is not. The New Realists of the early 1960s, for example, made it clear that they were not your grandmother's realists reveling in Caravaggio and Jacques Louis David but rather were trying to bring elements of representation to the Abstract Expressionist aesthetic. The Classical Realists of the early 1980s led by Richard Lack were differentiating their brand of realism from other forms of representational art of the time, even though they knew that within the context of art history "classical realism" was a contradiction in terms.

Realism can mean different things to different people and has changed meaning over time, which is another reason why it's difficult to define. Most would agree that realist painters are recognized by their choice of subject matter. Like Gustave Courbet--by most accounts considered the first Realist--or any of the Russian painters throughout history, a realist paints the real world and finds beauty and interest in everyday people, places, and things that the rest of society might find mundane. The realist is also defined by his or her technical execution, which aims for an accurate, truthful representation of the subject. The stylistic differentiation gets tricky among artists, however, because many realists who work from life do not want to be put in the same category as realists who work from photographs or in a  photorealistic manner. This confusion translates to the public, who will often comment that a painting looks like a photograph, as if that were the highest compliment one could pay an artist.

As you can see, the parameters surrounding realism are rather ambiguous. I think this is because realism is redefining itself as we speak and also because a new movement is on the horizon. I believe that movement will embody a language that is not yet in our artistic vocabulary, forcing us to find new words and a new criterion.

--Allison