Professor, Sudio Art: Drawing, Color

Current Research: Digital prints investigating perception using children's toys and activities.

BFA, 1968, MFA, 1972, University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois

Artworks included in over 400 exhibitions located in 40 different states and received over 90 awards.

Artist’s Statement

Like many artists, my current artworks contain qualities and attitudes that have been carried forward during most of my professional career.  My artistic interests center on the question of perception- what seems real versus illusion  (exhibited by the artwork or the person interpreting it).

On the most basic level, everything seems a matter of perception to me. When we look at a red apple, do we realize that the apple isn’t really red? We perceive it to be that through the interaction of reflected light and the sensitivity of the rods and cones in our retina. Additionally our perceptions seem to be in continual flux.  Yesterday I was extremely pleased and proud of what one of my children had done.  Today or tomorrow might be another story (same person/different view). My artworks are intended to raise questions about perceptions.

In my current work, the imagery depicts my young children’s toys which seem to play a large part in their developing view of the world. Batman, Ninja Turtle or Superman represent a view of an ideal- perfect body or personal attribute (“faster than a speeding bullet, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound…”). The heads are replaced with those of early American presidents.  Is it better to strive toward an ideal or model ourselves (pun intended) after a real individual?  We all remember that George Washington couldn’t tell a lie (seems rather ideal).

How an artwork is made affects our perception of it.  Do we give more points for handmade over machine? Is the handmade more about interpretation while the machine is more factual?  Most of my artworks employ both approaches. I enjoy the act of making marks in a handmade fashion but appreciate the use of visualizing tools (cameras, scanners or computers)  because they depict differently than what we see through our eyes and are a constant reminder that what we see is open to question. The structure of our eyes is different than a camera, scanner or copier.  These machines have a different lens and a flat recording surface in comparison to our iris and (the spherical shape of our) retina within the eye. Which approach records a truer visual image or does that really matter?