HB Art Gallery

Eye/flower

2012-06-07T20:50:00.000+01:00

So here's a painting I did, experimenting with an old bottle of ink that I found ( Windsor and Newton Drawing Indian Ink ). The technique is called spit-shading by a lot of people, but there's no actual spit involved.

On the right is the line inking (the page on the left of the image), and the initial sketch done on tracing paper (on the right)

The line ink prior to shading.

The shaded example. To be honest, I'm not happy with the eyelashes, and I've got this nagging feeling that it would look better if the dark shades were darker - however, I'm not going to touch it, just going to try to learn from it. I've learned that there's a point where it's better to leave something alone, start fresh, and try to learn from your mistakes. It's a lesson George Lucas should learn.

Robot Step-by-Step II

2012-05-30T13:48:00.000+01:00

Hey again, everyone, welcome to part two! I decided that it would be crazy to put all the pictures I have of the process in one post, so splitting it up seemed like the smart move. If you came here before Step I, here's a link to that. It's probably best to do things in chronological order.

Step Four: Working into the layers:

Shading the Ground:

Here I've added more Burnt Sienna to the landscape, especially in the foreground. It's undiluted, so the colour is stronger, and in the hills behind, I've worked in a mix of Burnt Sienna and Yellow Ochre wet-into-wet, and then added a little Titanium White to that mix and worked that wet-into-wet as well.

More after the jump

Texturing the Ground

You can see in the foreground I've added dark tones and light tones: the dark went in first, pretty much at random. It's a dark grey made by adding a little Ultramarine Blue to Burnt Sienna; the light tone is a mix of Burnt Sienna, Yellow Ochre and Titanium White, used to highlight around the dark patches to give them the impression of 3D

Shading the robot:

This layer is essentially just dilute Ultramarine Blue, applied wherever it seemed like a good idea to have a shade. If I'm imagining a light source without much other obvious sources in the picture, I tend to go for a light source from the left. No particular reason.

Working on the Dress:

The establishing layer I put down at first was dilute Emerald Green, so here I put in undilute Emerald green. It forms the midtone of the area, so I also add a little Ultramarine Blue to be the shade, and a little Lemon Yellow + Titanium White for the highlights.

Working on the Dress II:

I work all the colours while still wet - I think it's best for smooth shades in the long folds of fabric, especially matte fabrics.

And here's a close up of the dress so you can see what I'm getting at.

Step Five: Even more Shading

I've enlarged this one so you can get a good look at the greater amount of shading in here. Since I tend to work from light to dark (a legacy of my formative experience in watercolours), this is an indicator that I'm nearly done. The woman's flesh is painted with a mix of Yellow Ochre, Titanium White, and just a touch of Alizarin Crimson, then with a tiny bit of Ultramarine for the shade.
The robot has been shaded, not with black, but with a dark purple made by mixing roughly equal quantities of Ultramarine Blue and Alizarin Crimson. For the dark shades on the dress, a little of that purple mix was used, just watered a little so that I could feather it out.

In this image, you can see I tidied p the robot's head, and also a few spots of the sky that hadn.t quite been covered properly last time round. I added a few more white highlights to pick out the studs, and on the head as well. Finally, after cleaning up the speech bubble with a few coats of Lemon Yellow mixed with Titanium White, I went round it and the words with neat Payne's Grey. That was a bit of a strain! I actually very rarely use Payne's Grey, or black (apparently it's bad form), but in this case it was useful.

Step Six: One Last Thing:

And here we have what I'm calling (for now) the finished version. I added some highlights in pale yellow from the robot's head, and worked into the head a little with pure Yellow Ochre to give the filament a bit of contrast.

I think I've learned a lot about painting in Acrylics from doing this, mostly in terms of how they respond to the brushes, and in a bit of actual painting theory. I learned that I like the way contrast looks, and a little randomness in the landscape doesn't hurt.

Robot Step-By-Step

2012-05-30T09:58:00.001+01:00

Hey again, fellow travellers. This post is a step-by-step of the process I used to do my Robot with Lady painting.

I'm posting this because I would like it - I like step-by-step articles on just about anything, because I always like to see processes as they happen, and I figure, write what you love. So here goes:

Step One: Transferring the sketch.
(Doing the sketch I'm treating like a whole other process)

So this is the start of me transferring the original drawing to the painting surface. I drew the image directly onto tracing paper, turned it over and traced the lines with a soft pencil (e.g.4B). What you see is the result of putting the soft-pencil side of the tracing paper onto the painting surface, and running over the lines with a hard pencil (e.g. 2H) or a ballpoint pen (I used the pen).
The surface I'm using here is a sheet of hardboard cut to about A4, and coated with a couple of layers of gesso, applied with a housebrush. I like the housebrush, because it gives a grain to the surface that you can really get some paint in (I'll later experiment with applying the gesso with just a flat edge, so that it goes on smooth).

More after the jump.

Step Two: Tidying the transfer up

Transfers from tracing paper don't always come out perfectly, so it's very worth taking some time to put the detail back in. It's also a good time to change things a little, as you'll see in the close up.
Original sketch on the left, transferred underdrawing on the right. Note the the background, extra studs and the changed symbol on the chestplate

Step Three: The first layers of paint

After neatening up the lines, I painted in the midground and foreground with Burnt Sienna, making sure that the midground was lighter than the foregrounds (representing atmospheric perspective). I probably should have done the sky first, but to be honest I doesn't really matter because these are just light colour-establishing layers

I was swithering as to whether or not to go with a yellow sky, going for a incredibly bright painting, but in the end I went for purple, pretty much just on a whim.

And here we establish the robot's body tone.

And here we establish the colours of all the rest of the pieces. You can see that I've been treating the areas of the painting as seperate, (I realise it's a bit like painting within the lines), which is a bit of an experiment, as I haven't painted like this with acrylics before.

And here I've filled in the sky, trying to get it darker towards the top, and lighter towards the bottom (i.e near the horizon). If, on a sunny day, you look up at a clear blue sky, you'll see that it's lighter near the horizon and darker high up. I think that's to do with land and sea exuding water vapour.

That's about as much as I actually do to the sky for this painting, and more to come in the next installment!

Squid.

2012-04-30T21:51:00.003+01:00

15 pictures of cute squid

Yes yes please

Asteroid Mining and Subsea exploration

2012-04-25T12:21:00.001+01:00

I recently came across an article in Bad Astronomy (linked) that was about a new startup called Planetary Resources, featuring the investment of several billionaires, including James Cameron. This sounds plenty amazing to me - I love it so much when sci-fi becomes real. I suggest you read that blog article that I linked, as Phil Plait does it better than I will. Go read it, then come back

Ok, you done that?

OK, so those who know me know that I have a degree in Microbiology and Immunology Bsc Hons (the letters at the end are important for my ego - they mean Bachelor of Science with Honours (always makes me think of Bachelours Super-Noodles, which are what you eat when studying for your Bachelors - I wonder if there is a connection?)) . This is important for establishing why I love what I'm about to talk about.

When I think about space, it takes me almost no time at all to get to thinking about alien life. This is because it seems to me to be most likely that the first and later, most common Extraterrestrial Life we will find will be bacteria or bacteria-analogues (things that aren't bacteria, but are very much like them, and fill a similar evolutionary niche). Now since the kind of environments we are likely to find on other planets (or indeed on other sorts of celestial bodies like comets, asteroids and maybe even gas clouds) are generally considered extreme by Earth standards, it makes sense to imagine that any bacteria or bacteria-analogues that we find will be, by any reasonable definition, extremophilic. That is to say that they live and thrive in environmental conditions so bizarre, so extreme that until recently people thought that life could not live in these places.

The really deep ocean - like a few kilometres down (link to my new favourite graphic of this), can have a huge number of extreme conditions for life - super-pressure, super-salinity, super-heated water, totally unlighted water, liquid water below freezing point (yes, really), etc. Deep-sea is very unexplored, much like space in general. Deep-sea submersibles are very much like spacecraft in many ways, and deep-sea exploreres very much like astronauts. The research also ties in very nicely with each other - they're two sides of the same coin.
Take black smokers, ( link complete with sound recording - from the depths of the sea! How freaking cool is that!!!!!!!!) for instance. Discovered at the bottom of volcanic ocean trenches, they spume noxious chemicals at horrendous concentrations and super-heated temperatures, at depths with pressures that can scarcely be imagined. It is an environment that anyone could be forgiven for imagining was utterly inimical to life. But it's not. Not only does life exist there, but multi-cellular life. Complex life. Simple life like bacteria (or somewhat-living nucleic acid chunks like viruses) seems even more likely that complex life.

So what we have is evidence that life can live, sometimes in surprisingly complex forms, in environments that are mind-bending to conceive of. We also know that other planets have really harsh environments.

What I'm trying to say is that with the knowledge of extremophilic bacteria that we have, we have a reasonable hope that we might one day find ET life. Actual aliens. Real, genuine, real-life, for reals, for serious, in reality xenomorphs. Not quite as nightmarish as Aliens, hopefully.

What does this have to do with asteroid mining? Well, if you've read Phil Plait's post on the plan proposed by Planetary Resources, you'll notice that it makes a hell of a lot of sense. Step 1 is study. Step 2 is study more. Step three is do something about it. Look before you leap.

With increased space exploration, there comes an increased chance to find ET life - and here's the important bit - whether or not you actually notice it. It could be lurking entombed in asteroid ice shelves. We just don't know and can hardly predict. So we should be ready to recognise whatever tiny signs of life there are. The study of extremophilic bacteria and extreme environments, with which the ocean and other water environments are replete, gives us an insight into what kind of environments we know can and do support life - so that we can be more aware of the chances of finding life beyond our cradle.

What do you think about that?

Painting, permission and plagiarism

2012-04-03T16:16:00.000+01:00

I love the tattoo style. One day, I will tattoo. Until then, I practise, and try to develop a style of my own.

Recently, I have remembered being blown the hell away by a gentleman called Derek Noble. I looked him up, and looked at his paintings. I love his work. I think I should reserve a large patch of skin for him. Right lower leg, I think. Both sides. More likely, I will be able to get him at a convention some year, and he'll do a few hours worth on me. That's all off in the future though. Right now, I want to talk about influences.

It's easy for me to be influenced by another artist. It happens a lot. I imagine it happens like this to a lot of people. You see some new variation on images, some slight change to a set of understood symbols, and you add it to your own artistic vocabulary. I imagine influences apply like this to any creative endeavor (sewing, cooking, woodcarving, writing, film-making etc etc). It can be hard, especially if the new insight you have is really different for you, really profound, really hard hitting, not to fall into near- or outright plagiarism. People want to emulate their heroes. It's really common.

I'm trying hard not to plagiarize. I don't think I am - but seeing Derek's work gave me the confidence - and a sort of grammar of artistic expression - to use something that I have loved for a while. Big fat lines. Big fat fuck-off black lines. Happy man with a chubby marker pen. (of course, it's important to use varied width lines for a nice effect - more of that in the next post.) I swear, it was a revelation. Plagiarism, however, would be to copy something outright, without giving it credit as a copy. It's not creatively healthy to do either, but in science, we stand on the shoulders of giants: I see no reason that I cannot do the same
To get the idea, imagine you want to write a novel. You have a hard time, though, thinking of how to express yourself just right, in a way you like. Maybe it's a fight scene in your book. So what do you do? You can just hammer at it and hope to stumble across a format that you like, or you can look at novels that have already been written, and see what you like. Emulate it. Take someone else's idea and bash it out of shape and into something that fits you better. Like George R.R. Martin, or Dan Abnett. Those guys write fight scenes almost blow by blow, then pull back for a big picture, then go back in close for a gory finish.

That's what it was like for me to see Derek's work. It was like getting permission to do something I had always wanted to do, and shown how it could be done. Shown the gory finish.

Without much more ado, then, I present Snake Lady, in ten parts:

Incidentally, The Snake Lady original acrylic painting is available for sale from HB Art Gallery (www DOT hbartgallery DOT com)

Sharing a video.

2012-03-16T09:28:00.001+00:00

I know, I'm bad for not having proper original content. But the truth is I love to watch videos like this, and I want to share it as widely as possible. The original animation that was used for this video is a short animated film, about 9 minutes or so, linked in the description of this one on YouTube. I happened to prefer the musical oneI've posted here, but the original is very well worth a look.

Lyrics as follows:

(Verse One)I know of sin by the things momma prayedI know of heaven by the line at its gateI know of truth and America's wayCome drink the water if you want to be saved
(Verse Two)Don't drink the water if it's not from my streamIt's all still water if it's not flowing freeDon't drink the water at the watering holeIf you ain't got money, it can't save your soul
(Chorus)All God's people said amen
(Verse Three) It's not a sin if it can't make me cryHe's not the devil unless there's fire in his eyes It ain't the ghost if it don't speak in tongueIt's not a victory 'till the battles been won
(Chorus)
(Verse Four)Nobody prays unless they lose a sonDon't believe in God till a war's to be wonI know of truth by the lies I've been toldThe biggest one is that we're not getting old
(Verse Five)I know of sin by the things momma prayedI know of heaven by the line at it's gateHeard of a kingdom that's not far awayCome drink the water if you want to be saved
(Chorus)

I see it as a pretty frank allegory of the use of religion as an excuse for violence and the dominance of force.

What about you?

Amanda Palmer plays the Ukelele without Pretention

2012-03-14T10:07:00.000+00:00

You guys, you should know that I've become totally distracted from doing the big-ass post about Rubens.

Basically it was going to be all about the violence inherent in his paintings, how that ties in to his overtly religious themes (because religions are typically violent dichotomies of reality vs non-reality that do not live side by side), I set it aside after typing for, like, hours, meaning to come back to it, but lost the thread of what I was going for. And realised it was pretentious-sounding gobshite anyway. Since I love Rubens' work, I'll probably come back to it another day, but I don't want to intentionally put out something that even I know is pretentious-sounding.

And as you may have guessed, this post is vaguely related to that theme

Amanda Palmer, a nice young lady who co-founded the well-liked Brechtian Punk Cabaret (That's what they call the genre;I had to look up the meanings of those words seperately to see how they fit together) duo The Dresden Dolls, also does stuff on her own. One of those things is play the Ukelele and muck about singing songs that only-sorta rhyme. I like that

This was my favourite: Ukelele Anthem. You may like it too. As for me, I think I need to buy a ukelele and sing about things that piss me off in a happy way.

On Whininess (Whiny-ness?)

2012-03-05T11:11:00.001+00:00

This is not the giant post that's coming, it's just a stray thought that I thought would be worth publishing.

I was reading a little earlier the blog of a Nice Young Lady Natalie Reed, and specifically her post ''Shut Up, That's Why'' - A Follow Up. Most of it's not relevant to the bit I was going to talk about so copied and pasted below are the relevant portions:

" Atheists are so whiny.Just like the feminists. And the gays, with their demands for special rights. And the civil rights marchers. And the suffragettes. And the abolitionists.
For all the hundreds of times I’ve been confronted with this argument used to try to dismiss or silence some kind of advocacy, I have never ever been given a decent, consistent, workable definition for what is “whining” vs. what is a legitimate criticism or voicing of concern. It seems the only real distinction is whether you agree with the objection or not...Honestly, I would be happy to see the words “whining”, “whine” and “whiny” removed from the language entirely. I’ve almost never seen them used in a productive way. It’s like they were specifically designed for the purpose of trivializing and dismissing the pain, struggle or objections of others. It’s the ultimate red flag for knowing when you’re dealing with a “Shut Up, That’s Why”."

A dog will whine when it is uncomfortable - too cold, too hungry, feeling trapped, lonely, scared, harassed, restricted. The whining is there to tell you that something is wrong. It's an important social mechanism. Dismiss it as playing on your affections for sympathy and/or other rewards (or 'chancing one's arm' as it's known in Scotland) and you run the risk of ignoring an actual concern. You have to use judgement in every case, and not to have a blanket response.

People whine too, when things are wrong. If the roast you just got served is cold, you ask the waiter if you could have it warmed up, instead of eating the damned thing like a bloody martyr and then complaining to your wife who can't do anything about it - I'm sure we've all seen something like this. I have a cousin who specialises in it. (You don't have to as polite as to quietly ask for moar temperatures, but then I'm British. You could stand up, scream your head off, spit on it and storm out. I think that would all be quite legal. I think you could legally ask to see the chef and ask him "What the hell do you think you're playing at, serving me this cold food, please justify your failure?") It's feedback - the chef needs to know that he's sent out something cold that's not supposed to be, so that if he's got a professional attitude, he can correct whatever's wrong with his kitchen mechanism, or if he doesn't, then he will at least know that at least one person knew he wasn't doing his job well enough and maybe, if he gets enough negative feedback, will either shape up or ship out.

Same with life in general. Complaining, protesting, making a fuss, causing a kerfuffle, throwing a wobbly, and most importantly, doing it within the earshot of a relevant person, is crucial, absolutely necessary, if you want anything to change. Don't tip the waitress if she's not doing her job. Tell people when they're doing wrong.

In summary:

It seems to me that people either:

a) Do their job as best they can, notice and correct any flaws,

b) Do their job as best they can but fail to notice and/or correct any flaws

c) Don't care whether they do their job well or not, but somehow still make few enough errors to get by (this is rare) or

d) Don't care whether they do their job well or not, and get away with whatever is the minimal effort

In any of these cases, being whiny and telling someone if you have noticed a flaw in their work is important: if they do care, this person will find it useful to be made aware of a flaw that they hadn't noticed, because they can then correct it and make their work better, or seek help to correct it if they can't on their own. If they don't care, then at least they will know that someone has noticed and won't put up with their unprofessional shenanigans. So be like a dog, run the risk of being thought a chancer (at least as a human being you have the opportunity to refuse remuneration) and tell someone if you're pissed off.

What do you think?

Not gone quiet

2012-03-04T17:48:00.001+00:00

Well, not permenantly. I'm just working on some research for a big two-part post. Seriously, it's going to happen.

New Work

2012-02-18T11:19:00.000+00:00

Ok, I'm a day behind, I got distracted. By pizza-related shenanigans. And forgot to take the picture. But it's here now. I get there in the end. This one is not a step by step post, I didn't take pictures of the process as I went along. Is that something I should do? If you have an opinion either way, please let me know in the comments. This is a bit of a beach at sunset, at a village called Collieston, which is near to the city in which I now live, Aberdeen. It's a rocky motherlover (geogeeks, UNITE!) and all the rocks are slanted at the familiar angle. I'm not sure what rock the beach is based on - given it's location in Scotland it's a fair bet to say either granite or gneiss. Next time I'm there, I'll take way better pictures of the rocks so I can furnish you, dear readers, with my best guess. More discussion after the jump

Anyway, I was going for atmosphere in this painting, so I simplified the shapes a bit and some of the shades. It's supposed to look dusky, with less contrast than you would have in bright light. Needless to say, heavily weathered rock forms some pretty extreme fractures, which would look freaking awesome under a really strong mono-directional light. (Maybe that should be the subject of a study or two? It would get pretty abstract).

I could probably spend longer on this painting (something about the sea bothers me), but I'm just learning about leaving works before they're overdone, and I don't want to cock it up. As with many things, it's good to add extra in only small quantities, as you can always add more but you can't take it away. There is no way that I know of to erase oil paint, other than to wipe the whole canvas down and start again once the mess has dried. That may yet be necessary.

Learning Points -

1) Your undercoat will show through (giggety), so you'd better prepare yourself for the result of that.

2) Oil paints continue to be fun, but a little hard to wrangle with, especially where corrections are needed.

3) Yes you can do it alla prima in two days (because you're too impatient to wait for a week for the first lot to dry). Oh Bob Ross, y u no sad?

4) You can do a lot more with a very few brushes than you would think, so it's probably wise to a) learn how to clean and otherwise maintain brushes properly then b) get a small selection of high quality brushes, that you now know how to not ruin.

5) Take better pictures so your painting doesn't look bent.

6) Do studies of rocks and cloudy skies, because you will be painting a shedload of them, my son.

Anyway, if you have thoughts or comments you want to leave, please feel free.

Have a nice day.

Aberdeen, the Silver City

2012-02-16T14:15:00.000+00:00

I know it's been a while since my last posting, and I've been unable to maintain my commitment to discussing and presenting artwork on this blog; I'm sure that everyone can appreciate the hectic upheaval of suddenly moving cross-country. Now the dust has settled, and I'm getting back into a routine. At any rate, my move to Aberdeen, which might as well be referred to as the Windy City, has been exciting and informative. I've met some cool people - Nicole Porter of the Nicole Porter gallery, the friendly dudes at Rapport Tattoo and Tattooed Freak Body Piercing, which I think is related.

I've also met the Aberdeen Artists Society (at least one of them), which I'm looking to become a member of when I've got some stuff to bring along. I'm hoping that there I'll have some folk to talk to about art, and perhaps receive some instruction/motivation/inspiration. Speaking of which, I've also met Kenny, of my nearest art supplies shop, The Artist's Pad. And another thing - the Aberseen Art Gallery. It's brilliant. It's far beyond my expectations. The McBey room, where the work of Scottish artist James McBey is displayed, is magical. It also houses Rembrandt etchings, but I was't looking at them. And it has a free-to-the-public art library! Needless to say, I've had a busy wee while.

Now that my oils have come up from Glasgow, I'm looking forward to getting stuck right in. With some brand new canvas and a few photos of the Aberdeenshire village Collieston to hand, I'm about to have a batter at it.
Photos of that hilarious effort to be published on this blog, tommorow.

Some actual talking about art

2012-01-24T14:07:00.000+00:00

I have always intended to use this blog as a platform for artworks, and as a way or recording my progress as I strive to increase my art prowess. Thus I set myself a task - that I will write about art at least once a week and do a bit on a piece of my own also at least once a week.

This week, I'm going to do Landseer, because I picked an artist at random.

Just a brief look at his Wikipedia page will give you the bare bones of his biography and a couple of his more famous paintings. A little more Google-fu and you can see his less famous ones. I like these better. Olga's Gallery has a selection of more of them, my favourites of these being The Old Shepherd's Chief Mourner, which just about brought tears to my eyes, such is the pathos of the subject, and Jocko With A Hedgehog, which cheered me up again. The man was a really good observer of animals, and they way they move and sit. Discussion below the link.
I'm an animal-lover. Landseer did paintings for animal lovers. It's hand in hand really. But, as with so many things, Landseer's work isn't only what it looks like. Properly in context, it's a few other things. (I believe that I have also heard one of my friends, who shall remain nameless, as saying " I don't see the point in painting like these, everyone knows what dogs and mountains look like, you can just go and look at them.")

Landseer was active in the 19th century. He painted the kind of things that people liked back then. In the midst of the Industrial Revolution, more and more people craved for simple, rural pleasures, and artworks typically filled that void for those that could afford them. Romanticised versions of English and particularly Scottish countryside scenes were hugely popular, and there were a number of painters that almost specialized in them, Landseer being one of them. Sir Walter Scott had romanticised "the clans and glens of Scotland", the Royal Family hung out at Glamis, Scone, St. Andrews and particularly Balmoral, all scenic places, and tartanry became fashionable, so Scotland was a great subject for a painter.

Landseer's work also frequently features devoted pet animals (see The Old Shepherd's Chief Mourner), or working animals that love their masters (Shoeing - look at the expressions on the animals as they watch the man). This was a beloved theme in 19th English artwork, and Landseer was both prolific and good at it.

It's actually revealing about the character of the times. The perception was that hard work = godliness, and that rural work was hard work. While labourers of all sorts in all countries were viewed like this, rural labour was seen as cleaner and more honest, with healthy, bracing fresh air and a salt-of-the-earth attitude, and concurrent with the pro-English attitude of England in the time, British labourers were even more hearty, content and bluff. With the Romanticisation of Scotland, came the idea that we were 'noble savages' - the population of Scotland at that time was primarily rural, primarily little-educated, and not wealthy by the standards of the modernizing cities and they wealth generated by new industry. Thus, the Scottish people were seen as backwards, simple, poor, hardworking and spiritually untainted by the 'wickednesses of modern life'. Thus, the paintings of Landseer hit that fashionable note of rustic simplicity with their focus on 'the glorious wild', the wildlife that represented the abundance of nature that people seemed to yearn for (The Monarch of the Glen), and shabby people with dark homes and poor clothing that nonetheless are happy and virtuous in their poverty (A Highland Breakfast).

One could even go further than that, if one were partisan on the subject, and observe that to glorify the position of those in poverty as actually happier than most with money is a colonial attitude, that the patronising re-imagining of the poverty of those 'under the thumb' of the wealthy as virtuous is essentially the comfort that masters of slaves afford themselves whenever they wonder about ethics, and that Landseer's consistent theme of the devotion of animals to their owners is a reflection of the theory popular in the 19th century that all of the world was God-given to mankind to conquer and own, that man was the pinnacle of creation and that all was subordinate to him (and particularly, wealthy English businessmen). In short, the work of Landseer is an excellent depiction of the English attitude to the world in the Victorian era, a historical document providing an insight to the times.

Of Trolling Christians, wherein I suggest a method to discomfit people who try to save your soul.

2012-01-24T13:03:00.000+00:00

I know, its basically shooting fish in a barrel in this country, we're damned lucky. But I came across the full text of Luke 6:27-30 in a blog I was reading (Alethian Worldview) and it made me think. So I checked to see that it was indeed the whole section, and found a link to it as well so you can see for yourself. It reads:

²⁷ “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, ²⁸ bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. ²⁹ If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also. If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your shirt from them. ³⁰ Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back.

I draw your attention specifically to section 30.

And because Atheists are evil (as anyone knows, we're actually more untrustworthy than rapists - and yes I do know that the error bars are huge, but holy moly, anywhere near?), a plan began to form to make the next nutter who bothers me go away. Simply ask them if they are a good Christian - then if they believe that the bible is the word of God. This is best applied to biblical literalists. Then show them this passage in a bible, their own if possible. Then ask for their wallet. And their coat. And their shirt. Ask them not to cancel their credit cards so that you can pump them properly. Ask for their jewelry, including their wedding ring. Ask politely for the deed to their house. Ask for their wife, if you like, because a Christian woman swears to "love, honour and obey" (emphasis mine), and her husband, whom you ask, must give his property (i.e his wife, because wives and womenfolk in general are considered a variety of chattel). Thus he will certainly, indeed, cheerfully hand her over for any purpose you have in mind (my personal intention is some life drawing and a cup of tea) as he is a Good Christian and doing the work of God. Essentially this puts a quandry to the Christian in question: he must either be materially ruined or admit that he's a good Christian only when it suits him, which shows just how deep his faith goes.

Please try this and let me know how it goes. The worst possible result would be that you acquire all of the Christian's worldly goods. That would mean that there's another mind irrevocably lost to irrationality.

Just as a side note, if you were going to design a dogma to keep a slave workforce in line, and include the caveat that ignoring the dogma will result in everlasting torment after death, would this not be perfect? It might as well say "if someone brutalises you, deprives you and generally makes your life miserable, don't offer any resistance and accept it cheerfully or you'll get it waaay worse from the evil fairy tyrant in the sky." I can't imagine anything more efficient at keeping some slaves in line that informing them (especially while young and credulous) that obedience to this doctrine will provide you a state of "grace in adversity", and is thus to be desired.

The Independence of Scotland, a more serious look at it.

2012-01-24T12:23:00.000+00:00

So, Scotland is to be having a referendum amongst the population to decide if the general population is favourable to splitting with the rest of the UK and being a separate, entirely independent country in our own right. The rumouring that I have been hearing is that most people are generally against it - nobody really believes that it will go ahead. An article from the Scotsman claims that 39% of the population are for Independance and the rest against

I will say this - As of now, I hope that we don't achieve full independence. (See below for details)

For one, I have yet to see anything that looks like reliable, independent (pardon the pun), objective analysis of the risks and rewards. I would have expected proponents of the idea to have their economics and politics journals of repute in hand, practically straining to show you the cold hard facts that prove them right, or at least on a very accessible government website that clearly states why precisely, observably why, it is nothing short of pure common sense that drives us to this measure. I would expect to see debates amongst academicians. I would expect to see presentation of research. I would expect to see the peer-reviewed conclusions of eminent economists from several countries, not just Scotland, so we may rely a little more that they are unbiased.

Because it's not like moving house, and it's not just a case of building fence. We'd be doing some major reconstruction of our politics, laws, economy and society, so it makes sense to have a very damned good reason to do it. Surely, if it were so simple a matter of Better Off vs. Not Better Off, the evidence for that would be the very first thing you'd hear about - because if the facts were in your favour, then having an informed population would be of enormous benefit to a party, so the accurate dissemination of information would be critical to your position. Or are we seriously expected to believe that we're being done a favour and not told about it? Can you imagine the politician who had done some minor good deed and then refrained from crowing about it whenever his position gets slightly wobbly? Can you imagine that anyone, let alone someone in need of an accolade, wouldn't tell us all about how they are saving us from the brutal yoke, and show us the damned evidence?

In the Jabberwocky poem by Lewis Carroll, the hero remembers to take the head of the Jabberwocky as proof of his deed. I can't help but feel that we're being presented with a story of how an independent Scotland will be slain Jabberwocky, with no suggestion of a head to prove it.

Secondly, I'm not sure I like some of the propaganda-looking things that are associated with this referendum. Trying to get the voting age lowered to 16? Really? I'm not saying that 16-year olds shouldn't have a vote, but isn't it convenient that a campaign fought on stirring up the embers of resentment to Thatcher, embroidering it with some romantic crap from Walter Scott and his sugar-coating of William Wallace and then pumping it out supported by a supposed significance with the Battle of Bannockburn? Where was this concern for the voting rights of the young and easily impressed on every other issue ever?

That said, it may not be all bad. It seems that at least we would have a larger voice in European Parliament. As a region of the UK, we are accorded 6 MEPs, which is approximately consistent with Luxembourg (Scotland's population is just about 6 million, Luxembourg's about 0.5 million). Apparently, were we to achieve independence, then we would be accorded a number of MEPs in accordance with countries more our size, like Denmark, who have 13. (link, section 4. opposition)

Would we be able to hold our own against the bigger fish in the pond, and resist their demands, or are we really better off as part of the UK I frankly don't know, but I don't think that it's a decision that anyone should take lightly, or on the basis of patriotic fervour, or any non-rational reason.

The Independence of Scotland

2012-01-13T11:12:00.000+00:00

So here's an opinion on this snakes nest:

Nah, not really. I just get the feeling that this is what is expected of me. This is a bit more like it :

I'm sure Mr. Salmond is a nice guy just doing what he think is best, but this was a good opportunity. Also, in the unedited version, checkout the outrageous photobomb from the guy behind:

It looks like he's watching the photographer as he's taking the photo of Mr. Salmond. It looks like the expression I wear when I watch a little child wanting to "clap ma dug" (pet my dog) while squealing '' A PUPPY!!!!!!!!!'' - a forced-tolerant expression alert for any signs that the child will put its fingers in the dog's eyes or mouth or anus. I'm not suggesting that members of the press should, or would want to, anal-probe the First Minister (though for a man of his age, prostate cancer is a real thing), but I am suggesting that the guy behind Mr. Salmond looks concerned about something and is trying to hide it. Maybe the First Minister has a killswitch which activates a concealed chem-injector rig and dumps 0.1L of pure adrenaline right into his bloodstream and turns him in to an unstable, frothing, homicidal, unstoppable killing machine. My god, it's the perfect plan.

"Friends, Romans, countrymen; lend me your haggis and Irn-Bru, that I may chow down righteously''

Nope, turns out he's just chillin', preaching to his homies. Like a modern-fucking-day jesus. That pose is reserved for fictional people.

Incidentally, something more serious is in the works, I just like to take opportunities for mockery.

I should probably add that these are not my photos and I do not own them or intend to imply that I do - I basically crudely swiped them from The Scotsman's website. They rightfully belong to The Scotsman, I believe, if the photographer has sold his rights to them.

Oils, Inspirations and Visions

2012-01-08T17:43:00.000+00:00

So I've recently been painting in oils. Water Miscible Oils, to be precise. They're made with safflower oil that has been chemically altered at the molecular level to be water-soluble. Paint and chemistry - together at last!

So it was important for me to try and do some research on the subject, since I have no formal art training and I understand that oils are a highly technical medium. I want to do well right away. I read some online tutorials about the subject as preparation, knowing, of course, that they wouldn't be quite enough. But at least I have a theoretical understanding of the very basics. I did some Googling around for these tutorials, scanned a few and discarded them, but there were two that stood out as being sufficiently nuts-and-bolts to help me - Jess Bates's website and Bill Martin's. There are, presumably, others that are technical in intention, but I'll have to get arounfdto them later.

It's also not enough to simply know how to do a thing - one also must know what to do with it. Sure I could be trying to do dry tonal exercises on spheres and cones, but to be honest that sucks boaby. I don't have the time or the canvases to spare on that, and little interest. I am aware that I'll probably have to do it to progress in the future, but right now I am focusing on having fun with the medium, mostly just figuring out for myself how the paint feels and works. The only problem is that to do anything other than dry technical exercises, it seems that one needs inspiration. And many days, I find that lacking.

Everyone has their own method of getting some inspiration together. When I feel like I need to do something, but don't have a clear idea of what I need to do, I generally round up my artbooks and leaf through them. I also do this with websites of artists whose books I don't own. So to present a very few of the colossal number artists whose work gives me ideas: dark-themed hyper-realist Michael Hussar, providing, if anything, a gruesome and insightful commentary through his symbolism (check out the piece entitles Vasoline), Scottish Colourist J D Fergusson who evidently delighted in the 'voluptuous delights of life', the expressive work of Chris Dingwell and the fantasy hyper-realism of Christophe Vacher, Paul Bonner and John Howe (I know, there's clearly something about me that loves highly detailed fantasy art). I might also suggest that one checks out the sculptorial/assemblage work of Christopher Conte, which I discovered through the tattoo blog Needles and Sins. I love me some mechanisms and biomechanical stuff. Oddly not so much in tattoos, though.

Anyway, these are a few of the things that I am drawn to when languishing in the doldrums, or lost in need of direction. Like a dog that instinctively grubs for the roots and herbs that it somehow knows will cure it of its maladies, I return again and again to these people's work, most of all the sketches and preliminaries. There's more, of course, but that'll have to wait for another day.

So there you have it - a little technique, a little inspiration and a buttload of determination, and I'll go from here.

Some of my projects

2012-01-04T21:31:00.000+00:00

I've been guilty of neglecting the art intention of this blog a little, but here I present a few of the things I've been working on.

The warm (averaging 9 degrees or so this week) wet weather here in Scotland this winter has caused fungi to sprout everywhere, which continues to delight and fascinate me. I didn't get the chance to do the macro shots I wanted, but next time, dammit, next time.

This is my very first attempt with oils - a crude, unplanned sketch on a cheap canvas. I find I like the texture of oil paint and I can see me spending a lot of time with oils in the future. A more serious discussion on oil painting and the way that I am trying to work is set for an upcoming post.

The outline for a whimsy in watercolour. I think it's going to be an interesting experiment in simple forms and bright colours, but I can't help the feeling that I've got to go weirder.

A sketch in black coloured pencil that I tossed off on the bus home. For style, I've been working on more solid lines and clearer, simplified subjects. I don't have the kind of control I want with coloured pencil, as it feels a little strange, but I think I'm slowly learning to use it with a bit more dexterity.

For a wee while I'm going to be focussing on the oils to get a grip on them. I know it's generally regarded as a massively complex technique, that requires at least months of academic education and intense technical study to even approach, but I don't have that. What I do have is paint, brushes, some canvas, some time and a fistful of determination, and dammit, I can work with this!

Anyway, that's probably enough excuses for now...

New Medium!

2011-12-28T08:23:00.000+00:00

I've recieved a set of water-soluble oil paints as a gift, and accordingly

there's gonna be some changes around here

In practise that means that I'm going to be experimenting with the new textures for a while, and there may be some new, weird stuff in the gallery of www.hbartgallery.com.

As ever, work continues to mean that if I have anything other than painting to do of an evening, then unfortunately painting must go. While I'm looking forward to having money, I've actually yet to be paid either, so it appears that I have fallen into the gap of the old axiom '' you can have time or money but not both'', as I have neither.

On Cynicism, Credulity, Scepticism and Self-Examination

2011-12-24T11:46:00.000+00:00

I have been reading a little earlier about a spectrum of scepticism, ranging from an uncritical, unchallenging belief in authority (credulism) to an all-doubting, nothing-believing nihilistic rejection of all trust in anything (cynicism). I have been doing so in this blog post in Almost Diamonds, a blog about scepticism and various other things. I call myself a sceptic, but I am forced by intellectual honesty to ask myself: Am I really?
That post, which contains some interesting links (this one was my favourite, because of the video), made me think about where I might fall on this topic, analysed and laid bare for your interest.

If we imagine a line with cynicism at the left end, and credulism is at the right, then I guess I'm a bit left of middle. I might appear to others to be strongly left, but that's not my self-perception. I don't want to be extreme on either end (so it's possible that my perception has been altered by my desire to be a certain way), but it's important not to decide on an outcome before doing the experiment, so I spent a little while examining myself and the way I think about things, and these are my initial findings:

I'm sceptical of things because I hate so much to be lied to. This is, in a way, both rational and irrational: in that, I couldn't give you a specific rationale as to why I detest untruth so much and at the same time, it seems like it must be a generally reasonable thing to hate, for pragmatic reasons (i.e. being lied to might cause an investment of resources that is then not profitable). This somewhat-irrational response to lying leads to a sort of occasional paranoia; for example, I have been known to shout at cosmetics adverts.

Case in point:
Check out this link to the Clinique website : http://www.clinique.co.uk/cms/product/franchise/skincare_antiaging_mpp.tmpl
notice the 'Age Defense Moisturiser'? What is that even? AGE DEFENSE? REALLY? Unless they have found a way to actually stop time, it's a:

Neither am I free of credulity. I do believe things, with poor, little or zero evidence, all the damned time. Yesterday in fact, I expressed concern about the concept of living in Manchester, based on no particular reason. (Societal memetics - I think I'm using that right - has given me the idea that Manchester was a bad, rough place. This is an irrational idea, and my girlfriend pointed out that I had never been to Manchester for more than a stop on a train and don't have first hand experience of what the city is like, and have no credible authority on whose data to base an opinion. She didn't say ''that's gobshite, dear'' because she's very well-spoken, but that is what it boils down to, and she was dead right.) Although this is a bad thing, and I apologise to the city and inhabitants of Manchester for my unthinking disparagements, I at least can examine a belief and reject or retain it according to merit. I will have no opinion on Manchester from now on until I can gather a proper, reasoned notion of what it's like.

So there are examples of me performing unreasoning cynicism (that cosmetics have the effects that they claim to), and unreasoning belief (that Manchester is a bad place), the former of which lands on the left hand end of the cynicism-credulity scale, and the latter of which would fall into the credulous, right-hand end of our scale.

I then must re-examine my unreasoning positions on these subjects, to see if there is, or not, a possible reason to hold them. Taking the example of cosmetics, is there any reason to believe that they do what they say they do? It depends, I suppose, on what they say they do. I am deeply suspicious of anything that is clearly counter-reality, like the magical potion from the above link that prevents aging. That's plainly nonsense. However, if my cheap basics-brand moisturizer from Boots claims nothing at all, other than it will make dry-feeling skin feel better, and it does, then fair enough. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

The blog post I referenced talked about finding a healthy midpoint between cynicism and credulity, which is where reason comes into it. I may be oversimplifying this, or I might have a bad handle on the subject, but it sure seems to me that to be a non-hypocritical sceptic, in addition to calling bullshit on actual bullshit, one must frequently, regularly and unstintingly re-examine one's notions of the world, compare them to evidence, and amend as necessary.

So that's where I stand; how about you?

Atheists around the world indirectly donate to troops

2011-12-18T16:16:00.000+00:00

Earlier this week I helped donate a care package to American troops serving in the middle east. It wasn't hard, and it was free, but I'll bet the people who received them didn't give a fuck that I and others didn't actually spend any money. I think they're glad to know that someone cares enough to spend thirty seconds typing a brief message into a box (seems somewhat sad that it's possible to imagine that thirty seconds of caring would be enough to brighten someone's day). I just regret to hell that I didn't tell more people about it. If anyone had asked me why I would want anything to be donated to soldiers, I would say the following:

Soldiers are people, in stressful positions, and people in stressful positions need to know that someone gives a fuck. Simple as that. I don't know much about war, or Iraq, or Afghanistan, or the war there. I've never personally seen someone be killed, or have personally killed anyone. I've never endured great deprivation, or mortal terror. But I am willing to bet that these things add up rapidly to feeling alienated and weird. Imagine you knew something, had experienced something, so powerful - almost defining - and no-one could understand? You could tell people and they would hear your words but they just wouldn't get it? And would it not be a relief for someone to say: 'hey man, I know you're going through some shit that I don't get, but I'm sympathetic, and here's a token of that'

How it worked was like this: A company (Revision Military) and a charity (Any Soldier) that started it made up a number of care package boxes with magazines, some beef jerky, and some Sawfly military goggles that the company make (apparently they are a desirable item). They then invited people to put a message on them to send to the soldiers out there. Atheist-in-the-military Justin Griffiths made this post on his blog Rock Beyond Belief to let his readers know there was something tangible to do.

We atheists apparently did a lot of this.

I was a small part of something, and it felt good. I'll be looking for bigger parts in bigger things in the future.

Any suggestions?

Belated snow pictures and open commissions

2011-12-17T13:05:00.001+00:00

Hi readers!

It's been a few days since my last post but, but now I rectify the situation! I have recovered my camera in just under a week, and am able to now present to you, dear readers, the snow day that was left to us in the West of Scotland after the Hurricane Bawbag; taken at the remarkable Colzium Estate and featuring Cala the dog.

Furthermore, upon completion of my latest commission, I am once again free to take them! This last one was a bit of a slog, and a steep learning curve, but after at least five separate attempts at it, I have done it to my own, and the commissioner's, satisfaction. If you are interested in commissioning your own original artwork from me, then please, by all means visit my website www.hbartgallery.com or email me at hbartgallery AT yahoo DOT co DOT uk. (unusual presentation of this in order to prevent spam.)

Part of the profits of my work are donated to the charity Cala's Biscuits Fund

Pictures of snow below the fold

A simple beginning

Inspiration Strikes!

A snowman made by my talented girlfriend; it vaguely reminds me of a monster from The Legend of Zelda.
Materials: Dog biscuits and snow on a park wall.

This bridge never seemed like very much to me before, but in the snow, it looked like the archetypal bridge under which Trolls may hide.

One of the wonderful things about Scotland is how careful our government has been about preserving the green places around our major cities. Things like this are mere minutes outside the city centre of Glasgow in every direction.

I love to see gnarly trees like this. At some point, this thing must have been split right to the bottom of the trunk, and two branches regenerated and grew up from that stump. I'm guessing from the fact that the tree is a hardwood and the thickness of the two trunks that this tree waas first cut down something like fifty years ago; the original stump would be very wide, and so the root structure of this tree may possibly be as much as two hundred years old.

Sincere Apologies

2011-12-11T19:12:00.001+00:00

To anyone who actually cared to see some pictures of snowy Scotland, I apologize. I cannot provide them. I have left my camera with the pictures in my girlfriend's house.

As a token of my profound and abject sadness, please accept these two amusing videos, featuring classy music.

What I love about this one is that it can be boiled down to three things:

The cool, cool music that sounds to me like it could have been taken from an 8-bit Nintendo soundtrack and covered by a bluegrass outfit

The way the dancers really seem to get into the spirit of sheep. How does this even? They really seem to be doing a dance that if you were to anthropomorphise a common field ungulate, they would in fact do.

Lastly the expression on the protagonists' face at the end. that man needs to replace all funny-face actors in Hollywood. Jim Carrey and Jack Black be damned.

I like this one because: Damn but these dudes look like bears!

Barack Obama, Hurricane Bawbag and Comics

2011-12-10T13:01:00.001+00:00

Hurricane Bawbag has come and gone, leaving my girlfriend's garden table completely banjaxed, and one of the chairs knocked over, as well as causing a power cut that prevented the digibox from recording Family Guy (OH, THE HUMANITY!!), leaving us here in Scotland at least with a nice wee blanket of snow; thin enough not to be very inconvenient and just enough to make everything pretty, and judging by the 1) amount of cloud cover (a full 8 Oktas for you meteorology geeks) and 2) length of daylight this time of year I think the snow will persist overnight and maybe even freeze a crust over it. Pictures coming in tomorrow's post.

I have also heard that someone had to explain to The US President what a bawbag was. I liked the mental image that sprang to mind.

OBAMA: What's all this about Hurricane Bawbag, then? Are we gonna need to send aid somewhere?
AIDE: Well, there's been a big storm over in the UK and the people of Scatch-lund are calling it Hurricane Bawbag because it's more annoying for most people than serious.
OBAMA: So what's a baw-bag?
AIDE: Um, a scrotum, sir.

OBAMA:

On an entirely different topicThis morning I've been catching up with my favourite webcomics SMBC Comics and Girl Genius. If you like webcomics and you don't yet follow these, then I suggest that you do: they're good. I've explored a lot of different webcomics over the years, and really, these and ChimneySpeak are the only ones that I've cared to keep up with. SMBC is good for three reasons; the satire, the surreality and the simplicity. Zach Wiener references relevant topics and rightly ridicules the ridiculous, all in a simple and convenient format that ttakes only moments to ingest.

Girl Genius on the other hand, is a grand adventure story told with humour and poking fun at established grand adventure tropes, and a healthy dose of Mad Science.

Chimneyspeak is like an extended penny dreadful, set with humourous sidelong glances at Victorian London. Featuring tarts with hearts, psychotic aristocrats, Quentin-Tarantino-defying blood splatter, lesbian Russian gangsters and good, old-fashioned Scottish Stereotypes (link to character bios here). Basically a hilarious melange of shagging, violence and severely damaged psyches depicted with a cocked-eye, a well-developed sense of irony and possibly a top hat and moustache.

Please accept my hearty exhortations to at least give these a shot.

Telling the Internet, Part I

2011-12-06T22:16:00.001+00:00

My brother and I were chatting tonight and abstracting ideas as we do. I forget how we got onto the topic of 'what would be the best way to upgrade your genitals'. After considering the practicalities of having a plastic surgeon remodel your junk into the shape of either the 'Oseburg' viking ship or a chainsaw, we wondered if it would be possible to have a soundbox implanted to get the 'revving' noise that is so characteristic and impressive.

Would you like to know more?

I mentioned that a) I'm sure it would be possible to get a small device implanted that plays the noise at need and b) that surely such a device could be Bluetoothed to an iPod or somesuch.

There is no reason you could not aftermarket modify your genitalia to play my brother's favourite song.

We then moved on to what songs would be most amusing if you did indeed have the ability to make music with your wang. My brother mentioned MC Hammer, meaning Hammertime, but he's phrased it 'what MC Hammer rap would be most appropriate'. I was googling for MC Hammer's discography in seconds. The results were much funnier than expected.

1987: Feel My Power
1988: Let's Get It Started
1998: Family Affair
2001: Active Duty

And my personal favourite:

2006: Full Blast

We laughed. It was nice.

Any other suggestions for (in)appropriate themes? Others I thought of as good canditates are swelling (pun intended) orchestral anthems. The Russian National anthem springs to mind.