Love
Defining love is a futile attempt undertaken by humans since the beginning of time. Everyone seems to have a definition. Everyone seems to know or completely ignore what love is. People try to explain a source, a location in the human psyche, a physical location, a recipe, the actions that define love, and a justification for all the above. Many books have been written about it. Movies try to portray so many versions of love that generally end up being one of the same, some for good and some not so good, but generally focusing on the fairytale love.
One movie comes to mind: Love Story. This movie was filmed in 1970. I was born in 1975 but didn’t watch this movie until late 1980s I think. Or was it 1990s? I don’t remember that specific detail. I do remember that I was at my grandparents’ house and heard the famous music, so I decided to watch the movie. I found myself swimming in my tears as the credits began to show. Only a few times in my life I cried so much specially watching a movie. Why did she have to die? I also cried watching the 1994 version of Frankenstein. Dr. Frankenstein also had issues with death and people dying, but I didn’t cry about that. I cried when ‘the monster’ was attacked by the son of the old man after he was the one who saved the old man from attackers. Not to mention that he saved the family from starvation and restored the harvest. It felt unfair to me.
Death, attack, unfairness, and sacrifice are the definitions of the love I came to know in Jesus Christ. Because he loved me first. I saw the example in my parents and my family growing up. I keep trying to learn to love that way. That love holds my marriage and family together and I hope my kids learn that too and pass it along to their families in due time. People are going to die, we are going to be attacked for what we believe and the way we live, life is not fair, we have to sacrifice many things and even our own lives, and still not understand such an amazing love. Love is so hard to comprehend that it is easier to fall for love that is fake, distorted, selfish, and transient.
On Art Nouveau
Before I knew what Art Nouveau was I was already drawing using organic forms, nature, and using the figure in this environment. During my college years, now that we are on the subject, I was unable to relate myself with the style. I guess I was too focused in following directions and finishing projects than finding myself and my style. A few years ago I began creating again and trying to figure out myself in order to answer the question, ‘What is your style?’ In a conversation with a colleague she made me look at pictures of art nouveau. That answered my question. My style is art nouveau. There is no doubt about it. There is no shame either. We understand each other well.
Art Nouveau was a movement that appeared at the end of the 1880s and disappeared at the beginning of the 1900s with art deco. I see art nouveau as a new baroque with less clouds and fabric but with more nature. That’s just my definition. That energy of the baroque is still latent in art nouveau. On the other hand, I believe art nouveau gave a new life to the human figure of the renaissance. The figure in art nouveau uses the figure somewhere between renaissance and baroque. The figure is involved and immersed in the nature and organic shapes but not completely dominated by all the energy it portrays but more like a calmed balance.
I was hooked on art nouveau even before I knew about it. I use the ‘whiplash’ through all my work. It made me feel at times that I was born in the wrong time. Now that society is more and more inclined to the organic and natural, and nature I think I’m in the right time. My new collection in process is more art nouveau than never before. The new bas-reliefs will not only be on a wall, they will dominate the wall. The sculptures abide with nature and embrace it in a rhythm of waves, vines, leaves. The figure rests and celebrates this environment. I can’t wait to have this new collection complete and revealed.
Share this: