Painting connection with a viewer

I just received a very kind email about this piece:

©2009 Josh McCallister

Established is the fifth painting in a series on repentance and cleansing. It was on display for a show about the season of Lent at the Evanston Atelier, Evanston IL...

What is spiritual about viewing art?

A recent article got me thinking about the ways people experience art and extract meaning from something visual. Often people refer to art as spiritual. As far back as we can gather data, art and spirituality or ceremony are fused. (Although today's religious mainstream can sometimes try to suck the art and mystery right out of devotion and prayer.)
When a piece of art is created, the artist might have intended meaning for an image or symbol, but the viewer will make his or her own connections. There will be unintended meanings construed. Contemporary artists are usually reconciled to this lack of control on the viewer's subconsciousness. What the viewer gets out of the viewing experience is up to them. Something spiritual happens - not cognitive, not manipulative, not logic alone.
There is an interaction between the piece and the viewer, thus the piece becomes autonomous. So this inanimate object/ image is engaging a person emotionally, intellectually, physically. One further aspect of good art is that it's more than a snapshot of a moment, in my opinion. It transcends a moment, exists outside of the constraints of time. That, to me, is also spiritual.

I guess this is Josh's art appreciation 101. Maybe I'll get writing on how to view MY OWN art for readers of this blog.

Maybe this blog should be about viewing art

Because I think (gifted) artists were given a gift for a reason, I want all people to view art! Knowing a lot of farmers and rural texans, I've got a good impression that the bulk of working folks in America are not savvy on things related to art. I remember taking a friend from Arkansas through an installation by another friend about ten years ago - at the end he asked, "Was that supposed to mean something?"

With my Josh McCallister Art facebook page I've tried to start a discussion asking who is looking at art made today. One of the first responses was, "Do you think 'normal' people know how to view art?": yes and no. People do know a bit about what they see. People are drawn to certain colors, shapes, icons, themes... But there are other things in the evolving realm of visual art that most people have not been educated about. And that's troubling me.

I'm not qualified to teach art history - maybe the humanities, or art appreciation. But this is a blog, not a class. I want a conversation here.

Here's an opening thought: Most art is made with one or two of three basic "ends" in mind;
The process itself,

J. Pollock

the viewer (and their interpretation),

B. Kruger

or the autonomous piece of art serving as its own reality.

M. Rothko

What sort of thoughts come up for you? Where should we go with this conversation? Which of the three motivators I've listed appeals to you?

Portrait with a background

My latest painting: Allan

©2011 Josh McCallister

Allan

Watercolor on paper, 12 x 9

This is a part of my ambitious project to paint the people in our community - about sixty faces. Here I did a couple washes and some lifting for the background.