Pete Nawara's photostream  

As an artist, I often find myself reading artists statements of various kinds. Time and again, these writings consist of endless babble about what the artist thinks the viewer is interested in knowing about the work. Usually, the artist is completely wrong about what these things are. I do not claim to be any different. In my original writings for this document, I will admit that I did my fair share of babbling, mostly about my concerns of the art world, i.e. Conceptual Art.

I have found myself in too many museums, completely bewildered by what artists are trying to say, and most of the time, completely disgusted by what they are getting away with. Don’t get me wrong, I am aware of the important impact conceptual art had on art history, but the statements people are making today are commonly irrelevant to society, or if they do hold any significance, it is completely lost on the general public. This isn’t even the worse part. Usually, it doesn’t even look good.

I strive to make objects that are aesthetically pleasing. This, first and foremost, is my goal. I want to make a material thing that can be appreciated visually regardless of the viewer’s art education. Why should someone need an art degree to understand or feel a connection with a piece of art. I feel that my place in the art world is a struggle against just that.

With the use of color and composition I attempt to create a visual landscape that allows the viewer to tirelessly view the work. Whether it’s a portrait, an abstract piece, something illustrative, a landscape, or a figurative piece, my primary focus is to assemble a combination of qualities, such as shape, color, and form, that pleases the aesthetic senses. Any conceptual message is inserted as a secondary device, usually for my own amusement.