When is change necessary and at what point is it just to facilitate the status quo?
Yesterday, my daughter mentioned that she missed the freedom of riding her bike around our
Her comment reminded me of how I felt years ago in
My wife has a similar bond to the farm house experiences of her youth. At the age eleven, her family moved uptown, as well, leaving the farm-life and its child-envisioned freedoms behind. I know our parents had all the best intentions when they moved for the sake of their children; as did I when I relocated my daughter from that slow-moving high plateau near the Canadian border to the much classier high desert coolness of
Growth and change are necessary in art, but occasionally the purpose of one can mislead the other. Occasionally, we require protection from our protectors when too much safety can feel claustrophobic and what we need most in life is a touch of trouble in order to build the soul. At what point, though, can an artist step outside of their comfort zone to experience the artistic style of the region without becoming a charlatan? When can that same artist refuse the change and simply utilize the region itself to glean inspiration without falsely-embracing popular culture? Most importantly, though, when does environment no longer matter and the artist can ignore the status quo and simply encompass the nature of the label without becoming labeled? - DN