Being told your work has "no soul"?

Post Reply New Topic

when i was a child, my piano teachers constantly told me that i was technically proficient, but that my playing had "no feeling".

in secondary school (high school) my art teacher said my still life and self portrait drawings were 'soulless'.

i stayed away from artistic pursuits as i never thought i was any good at it.

now that i'm making miniatures, i have been told that my work is too precise, and again, lacking soul and emotion.

i'm not sure why it bothers me, perhaps because i've been unable to understand their criticisms as i have not understood how to quantify 'emotion' in a piece of craftwork.

does anyone else have a similar experience?

Yes!! !! !! !! !! !! I was just thinking about how frustrating this is. I play guitar and have had the same criticism. Art has this non- measurable quality that drives me nuts. One trick I learned is when playing the dramatic parts is to make faces like I am in pain. Also to bend the strings "slightly" out of tune. When I do this it seems to make people think I am playing with " feeling"
I have often thought that "feeling" and "soul" are often excusses for poor technique and lack of abilitly.
Also Art has a context outside the media itself. For example: I could play a Muddy Waters, or John Lee Hooker tune note for note, but it would not be the same, as I have not lived the same kind of life that they had. It's out of context.
Make the Art that makes you happy. That's the best "feeling" you can get.

That seems a strange comment. Art is most importantly for the artist creating it. Keep at it and make lots of it. Artwork always evolves and that's a lot of the fun for me - to see what the changes are and how it matures.

I probably point this out too often, but I have two college degrees in music, with my master's degree in composition.

And I can totally relate. I also teach piano and would love to teach music composition if I had any interested students with a proper musical background. To teach musical improvisation (which, along with playing by ear, is essential to composing) and composition, being a tough critic and a slave-driver is just part of what it takes to do good work. I don't mean to side with your teachers. But I will say that I've been there, too, and I also have the perspective of being a teacher myself. I hope I can offer something helpful to you. The best single piece of advice I can offer is "keep doing what you do." All else follows from that.

Here's how my graduate level clarinet teacher explained it: Music is like magic--nothing but smoke and mirrors. No matter how much you "feel" something or you think you're putting that into your performance, if someone else cannot perceive it then it might as well not be there at all. You have to figure out what it is that makes a performance "musical" and deliver THAT, not what you "feel."

That doesn't mean you shouldn't feel ANYTHING. It just means you have to look at it from an audience perspective. Are you communicating what you mean, and does your audience "get" what you're trying to express? That's what it really means. For me, those are rare moments when EVERYTHING is right and just falls into place. Here's a link to something I've done that I felt really good about: Rejoice!

One of my most recent piano pieces starts out with the instruction "In shades of grey." I personally find a lot of art and music to be too "bright," maybe even gaudy, and I feel the need to write "cloudy" pieces. I enjoy a lot of SPICY food, but my music is bland by comparison. But that's how I see the world, in shades of grey. Now, sometimes I DO feel excited and I write spicy, "cinematic" pieces. I also know how to write music for a specific purpose. If I'm telling a story and there's a chase scene in my story, I know how to write that. But left up to emotion I tend to be more lazy and hazy. There's nothing wrong with that unless I get stagnant to the point that's all I ever write. But on the other hand, while I like greasy, spicy food, a lot of people get bad indigestion from that or they don't like being overwhelmed with a lot of "bright," acidy tomato, lemon/lime, and vinegar flavors. So it doesn't bother me if I write bland or "medium" music because SOMEONE out there needs to hear that.

I'm also a sound designer, and I tend to lean towards very bright, clear kinds of sounds. The trouble there, though, is too many of those kinds of sounds from digital synthesis (like FM) and sampling come across not really as being bright and clear but cold, metallic, and harsh. On the other hand, sounds made by analog synthesizers (which I also use) are typically perceived as "warm" and "fat." However, and this is the problem I have with people who swear by analog synthesis and analog modeling, there is a fine line between "warm"/"fat" and "muddy." Where/how do you draw that line? It's really easy--balance your samples and digital sounds with analog, pay close attention to your analog filtering, pay even CLOSER attention to the purpose of the particular sound (basses shouldn't be bright, bells shouldn't be muddy, pads need to sit right in the middle, and overall you shouldn't have too much going on if you're trying to feature a single complex sound).

To be good at what you do, you have to learn two things: To be honest, and to be your own toughest critic. It's OK to make mistakes. It's ok to express how you feel through art and music. It's ok to be embarrassed. And it's also ok to set high standards for yourself and others, and to hold yourself and others to those standards. What is NEVER ok is to settle for any less than what you feel is your personal best, and it's never ok to stop learning and improving. Incidentally, my wife and I partner together for one of my ongoing projects, and she doesn't have the same communication skills as a professional musician. We also have a close, intimate relationship, which makes insisting on having my way on an artistic or performance issue extremely difficult. She has the ability to fire right back at me when I give criticism, but the sad fact is criticism is 100% necessary. As a composer and professional musician, it's my JOB to be critical. It's a challenge, especially because we can't seem to put emotional boundaries in place. I can't say what I need to say without upsetting her, but if I can't say what needs to be said and she can't handle criticism, we can't make it work. It's really tough. But little-by-little we make it work.

Something that I think will help you is try NOT to get so emotionally attached to your artistic endeavors. I composed two ambitious pieces towards the end of last year, one of which was just a hymn arrangement and the other was loosely based on a hymn tune but largely made of original material. Those pieces worked extremely well with my audience. But I also have to accept that if I want to keep doing what I do, I can't keep the mindset that everything I do is going to be an epic hit. Not all of us are going to produce an MJ "Thriller" album, nor is that a good mindset. I'm going to make some truly horrible music from time to time, but that also means the rest of the time I'll make music ranging from ultra-mediocre to absolutely stunning. I can accept that. I also personally know a famous Christian songwriter who has had big publishing deals with major players in the industry. He will tell you he's probably written over 200 songs, with only a TINY portion of that anyone will ever hear.

And one of my favorite painters of all time is Renoir, someone I tend to obsess over. He ALWAYS painted, even when arthritis took his hands he'd have brushes tied to his hands so he could work through the pain. He had an attic FILLED with his painting that would be consigned to the fire when they began taking up too much space. When he got older, younger artists would bring him paintings, which he didn't always know whether they were his or not, so he'd "touch them up a bit" and sign his name to them. There's no telling how many Renoirs there are out there that are really fakes. And there's also no telling how many genuine Renoirs there might have been if they hadn't all been destroyed by the artist. The point being that Renoir believed in the value of hard work, making a buck or two when he could, and he recognized when something was acceptable and when it was not. He also understood how famous he'd become, and he was a rare artist that made his complete living off his art. But he didn't care. All he wanted to do was paint.

I find those to be admirable qualities, and as a musician I find it inspiring. Learn to be critical and how to take criticism. Never stop learning, and never stop producing, even when you don't "feel" like it. It's probably obvious when I make something I'm inspired to make. But those moments when the muse comes down from heaven and whispers in my ear in French and suddenly the whole world makes sense again are extremely rare (i.e. that's not how it happens). I'll finish my work whether I "feel" it or not. At the end of the day, I might still have "inspired" pieces that really suck and I might have "uninspired" pieces that really blow me away. Just keep working.

Good luck! And keep in touch with us about what/how you're doing.

I'm establishing myself as a professional fine artist, and I've heard similar criticisms of some of my paintings. This seems to be especially true when I plan out my work in advance. In my senior studio class in college, I was working on a large abstract project, for which the final product was supposed to be 14 36" x 24" canvases. Before getting started, though, I began with small 20" x 10" studies for each part I had planned, just to work things out and get some compositional choices locked down before working on the final polished pieces. My instructors took a look at my studies, and then the first two larger pieces, and told me they liked the studies better-- they said the studies had an "energy" about them, from being improvised, that got lost in translation to a larger format with a more polished approach. So I abandoned the large paintings after completing two of them, and focused on filling up a whole wall space with the studies. I've also been told that I overwork and overthink some of my paintings, and that my real strength comes when I'm doing something very quickly and almost thoughtlessly, without giving myself the opportunity to smother it with too much premeditation.

It might be easier to know what you're talking about if you post pictures of your art.

I'm not really into art myself, but I would guess that 'no feeling' is code for 'bland.' Perhaps you need something to provide motivation to look at your art.

Chevand: Well put, especially about "overwork" and "overthink." I know we're talking about visual art here, but for me personally, things got better when I stopped thinking from note-to-note. I actually started recording my improvisations, analogous to your smaller studies, and started polishing up those improvisations only after committing them to paper. I was able to work faster and hang onto musical ideas longer once I started working that way.

Densaugeo: Also agree. I think there is a time and a place for bland, especially considering how many modern homes have walls painted beige. I had one wall of my bedroom (where I do my composing) painted red because I feel better stimulated that way--the other walls are painted yellow.

Snowfern: Do you have any photos of the work you've done so far? I think we'd be interested in seeing what "soulless" art supposedly looks like.

It is my opinion that soul/no soul doesn't even really matter, anyway. One of the most "soulless" groups of musicians out there KNOWN for their cold precision is Kraftwerk, and their music is AWESOME. Perhaps in a visual sense this is who you are. So go with it!

thank you everyone for replying, i am heading out for a doc's appointment soon, will check back on this later and have more in-depth replies.

my online portfolio is here:

http://snowfern.deviantart.com/


most recent works.

i consider myself more of a craftsperson/artisan than an artist. will discuss further when i return

Must be an NT thing, I find that does too have soul.

And my stomach is kind of really craving a cupcake now. D:

Actually, I get told the opposite - that my drawings are full of emotion and character, but that I lack technical skills such as anatomy (all of my drawings are of people).

You have so many positive comments on your dA page, I'm surprised you concern yourself with a few snide comments over time.

A lack of soul in art is an interesting thing for someone to resent. What I can't see in someone else is sometimes what I can't see in myself. How can anyone judge your soul and how you do things? I suggest to you that doing exactly what should be done for done's sake can make something feel soulless. Doing something unnecessary out of pleasure or pain can add depth to work. But, most people don't look at a final product and try to make a story of the creation process. From a culinary perspective, I suspect that's where most depth in what you do comes from. So being judged by someone who can see beyond that depth should hurt a little less, they see what most can't and what they see is weighted by what they've seen.

I am a violinist and I was close to failing my examination (117/150 - Passing Grade is 100) last year due to my playing being bland. It is a constant reminder that I am unable to put any feeling into the piece I am playing.

why it bothers is because if i cannot understand or grasp these criticisms, how then can i improve in my works? being technically proficient at my craft can only take me so far...

it is extremely frustrating to know that i am good at what i do, yet my works come across as clinical, overthought-out, cold and 'soulless'. i have never been afraid to embarrass myself, though looking back at my earlier works, it does induce a cringe or two XD

i have been trying to put together scenes, thinking in 'the big picture' is not one of my strengths, often i obsess over the details and forget about what i'm trying to achieve overall.

as Chevand puts it, i too, tend to do better when i'm given a goal (commissions), i dive right into it and come up with interpretations that work well, and closely to what i'd been given to miniaturize. otherwise, you'd find me seriously overthinking, overplanning, and overwrought (snort).

spacebrain, those were not snide comments, they were criticisms by teachers, peers and close friends. if anything, so far i have not received any negative responses from the 'general public'. it has led me to think that people either are too polite to offer a critique, and when i ask for one from people i trust (my family and few close friends), the response is often the same, "clinical, cold, too 'perfect'".

i lend feeling during the process of making the items, often of pain and frustration from working through my RSI-s! if anything, most of my works are born out of obsessive moods.....you know? that itch in your brain.....?

AngelRho, thank you for sharing your insights on this. i suppose for music, as well as the visual arts, i am able to take away feelings of awe, and emotion, but am unable to create the same for others. i recall my music lessons being rather torturous, i could sight read and memorize my piano pieces rather well, yet was berated over and over again for having no feeling in my playing!! i gave up after barely passing my grade 5 practical exam.

it is frustrating for me, when searching to improve upon my craft, to hear that the thing that is lacking, is 'soul'. i still do not understand this, if it were something more tangible, perhaps i could work on it, i'm sure i have 'soul' and 'character' in me! failing which, i would probably inject 'whimsy' into my works as a last ditch attempt to improve. heck, i haven't even developed a style yet!

it is interesting and re-assuring to read that some of you have had similar critiques/criticisms. not that i know what to do with it really.

I've made collages and the criticism that they don't communicate well has been applied to them. That was awhile ago and I've been working since then and I wonder if the same criticism can still hold. I'd like to share them when the rules allow me to.

OK... I had a chance to actually see for myself your particular kind of artistic expression. I'm really impressed with what you do with miniatures. That's just not something that I personally understand nor have the ability for. There is a collaborative project that has been done before called the 60x60 Project, which takes 60 composers each writing musical sketches that last exactly 60 seconds and matches each piece with a video submitted by an artist. Anyone who's read my PPR posts in here knows I lack a talent for succinctness, and I just can't say what I have to say in 60 seconds! I'm writing a new piece and was distressed that my first little phrase took 1:30 to get through, and that was at a high rate of speed (or tempo).

That said, I have to admit that I don't "get" what you do--not because you aren't good at it, but because what you do isn't an art form that I'm familiar with or have regular exposure to. I am impressed, however, with the high level of skill it must take to create miniatures, and I will praise you for that!

I think I kinda see where your teachers are coming from looking at your miniature work. I can definitely see a high level of precision in your work, which I actually do find impressive. Just my opinion, but I do get a certain sense that your work has, I dunno, maybe a mass-produced look about it. This is not a BAD thing, and I'm not saying your work looks cheap or ugly. But it does lean towards a certain "manufactured" look.

I have a suggestion: Are you familiar with the "Persian flaw"? It is a deliberate "mistake" or "flaw" woven into Persian carpets, and yet it is something that makes each carpet completely unique, special, and thus valuable. Your concern, I think, is for the perfection of your work. You could, for instance, spend a little time making a miniature ceramic figure, after which you could "accidentally" drop it on a hard floor. Pick up the pieces, glue them back together. Make another ceramic figure which will be a copy of the first one, but paint the cracks of the broken ceramic piece into the second one, making the cracks look as realistic as possible only until someone looks very closely. When solid objects break, there's no predictability as to how they will break. This introduces chaos into your art, which is just the thing you need to get away from your more rigid approach. And once your unbroken piece looks perfectly like the broken piece, paint one more crack line into the unbroken piece that isn't in the original. There's your Persian flaw, and thus a tiny bit of "soul."

When I compose, I begin with simple improvisation, trying out ideas on a whim. Then I write them out. Written music, as I'm sure you'll understand, HAS to be notated in a very strict and precise way, otherwise it won't make sense to a performer who has to interpret it. What I will do is first record a rough sketch of my improvisations, notate them, and then re-perform the notated composition with better precision than the original free improvisation. While this is a lot closer to being "perfect" than the original, sloppy improv, there are tiny variances in timing, subtle nuances that give the computerized sequence a certain human quality. What I used to do when I first started composing was after a modulation, I'd "miss" the accidentals in the new key signature, causing a brief moment of what we call "modal mixing." Classical composers like Haydn and Mozart did something similar in their keyboard sonatas by using what we call a "false recapitulation." This technique misleads the listener into thinking that the performers are going to merely reprise the exposition when suddenly they revert back to ideas expressed in the sonata development. But it's these misleading elements which create the surprise and holds audience interest.

You can bare your soul in your artwork, by, for instance, creating something that misleads the viewer into thinking an object is something other than what it is an surprising the viewer on closer inspection. The surrealist painters, especially Dalí in "The Persistence of Memory," were experts in this. Postmodern artists are expert in blurring the lines between what an object really IS and the meaning behind it.

I hope that's helpful. And just so you know, I personally don't see anything really "wrong" with what you're doing. Your work looks great, in my opinion. I look forward to seeing more of your work!