Skip to main content


Gill and I are both artists. Difficult to describe the difference between us in our approach to painting, except to say that Gill is entirely intuitive. She picks up her brush and paints. Over the years, she has acquired a few techniques that help her achieve her vision, but essentially Gill paints what is in her, unhindered by how one should do it.
I, on the other hand, am more considered with my artwork, as with most things I do. A painting may be completed in an hour or so, but it will have taken me many hours to work out the what, why and how of the result. Over a lifetime of drawing and painting, I can now see that what I produce has a 'style', a signature, which is intrinsically my own, no matter how I might try something new. I can paint with freedom or restraint, the result is still me. 
So in that we are the same; we paint as we are. Gill, the Romantic; myself, the Classicist. It is that to and fro in temperament that Kenneth Clark described so well in his book The Romantic Rebellion. Each artistic season is superceded by its counterpart; except for Gill and myself it is inextricably intertwined in an attraction of opposites which keeps our marriage interesting and together.
I need Gill to keep me dreaming, and Gill needs me to keep her anchored.
Of course, neither image shows the finished picture, because it isn't yet.
Only this afternoon, Gill took one look at my latest piece (one with which I have been wrestling for some time now) and declared, "You've wrecked it. It was lovely before, but you insist on putting mud all over your pictures." Or words to that effect. She may have a point, but I felt that everything was too clear and bright before. Too unfinished. I like the texture that the (colourful) mud brings. It brings doubt and mystery into play, a veil of uncertainty, which is echoed by the cataract forming in my eye.
For most of my artistic life, I have tried to make what I see clearer. I doubt if I have succeeded. After many years of trying this way and that way, striving for an ideal, I find that it no longer holds my attention. I like not knowing. Savouring the indistinct; the freedom from a tyranny of exactitude; romance in the cloud.


Popular posts from this blog


LAGOM KITCHEN I do not usually do restaurant reviews. I am not a food critic unless I break a tooth or fall ill as a result of dining, but today I felt to rave about a small eatery in Glasgow's Victoria Road. Lagom Kitchen is run by the elder daughter of close friends, so I am declaring a bias at the outset - although if I had found fault with this wonderful little establishment I would have continued my 'not a food critic' career.

Lagom - at least in this context - refers to the Swedish idea of simple and perfectly balanced, if I understand it correctly, and this is the simple and balanced description of Lagom Kitchen. The choices on a small but inspired menu cater for most palates and our lunch - capped with a second coffee and a dollop of exquisite cake -  met our needs for the rest of the day. Milady and I decided that when next in the city on business, we would take a detour to Lagom Kitchen. It quite made our day.
LOSING TOUCH WITH REALITY (Trump/Brexit and divisive p…


A fine morning this morning, so my usual habit of being sped around the village by our small terrier was unhindered by having to peer out from under my all weather jacket. There I was minding my own business, when bombini apidae suddenly ... I have never come across a case of dangerous driving in a bee before. Wasps, yes, but bees have always struck me as the gentlemen (and gentlewomen) of the airways, ever careful in their comings and goings. I can only assume that this particular bee was over-honeyed; under the influence of an over-indulgence in pollen, it was speeding its way hivewards so as to avoid 'the fuzz'; 'the boys in bluebottles'. And this bee surely struck me. Square in the right eye. It, the bee, was unfazed by the encounter, barely batting an eyelid, so to speak, before resuming its journey. I, on the other hand was much discomfited. I was not stung and the only hurt was to my dignity and to the dog as it was whirled around me like a windmill as I sought…


Recently, I have found myself considering the subject of objectivity. Many years ago, as an employee of a large UK insurance company, one of my colleagues - a trade union rep - approached me and asked for my opinion on some pressing staff concern or other. He did so, he said because "I know you can be objective". This had never occurred to me as a quality I might or might not possess. I always understood that I was just slow. Not stupid. Slow. Now - reminded of this incident - and realising that objectivity (being able to step back and assess a situation 'in the round', even should it tell against yourself) is a family trait, I seem to discern that being objective is not a common quality ... at least not today. Maybe it was common currency in days gone by, but the 'Age of Reason' is now only mentioned as history. We live in the Age of ... what exactly? Certainly everything happens with such speed that Slugalug's like me are an anachronism. One does not n…