I know what I like

I've been thinking about yesterday's art exhibition.  While we were there one of the artists came up and explained her work to us.  She was exhibiting a number of pencil drawings of clothing from her grandmother's closet and representations of fine lawn handkerchiefs drawn in ink on a light table on a translucent material.  When displayed against light they appeared transparent. 

What had attracted the artists to this material was the tangible connection to the past, her grandmother and objects that carry with then the imprint of those that have used them. This is just a summary of her explanation which went on for longer than we'd expected...

It got me wondering about the extent to which the artist's intention is important to the viewer.  Sometimes the intention is inescapable, such as when a picture carries a clear political message.  The artist is saying...I want you to think about this!   But in other circumstances, does it enhance our appreciation of a picture or work of art?  In most cases, I don't think so. 

We have three paintings by a chap called Nicholas Simington.  Here's an example of another work by him in a similar vein.  I like the rhythm in his work, the juxtaposition of limbs and heads, the colour, the vulnerability and the strength of his people and, above all, the ambiguity.  What's going on, who are they, what's happened, what time and place do they inhabit, what are they feeling? Are they watching something, waiting for something?  I like to speculate and at other times I just enjoy the surface appeal. 

I've just this minute found a web page with more of his work on it and an explanation by him of his approach to his painting!  It turns out that what he's trying to do is just what I've been seeing.  How do I feel about that?  I'm thinking about it.   (Gill, don't go and buy them all, there are some I haven't seen before and want!)