| James
Naughton Profile
James Naughton was
born in Bolton, Lancashire, on the 6th May 1971,
and apart from his three college years in Leeds
and a short spell in America, he has never left.
It is from this large provincial northern English
industrial town that he began what was to become
a most extraordinary career as one of Britain's
most accomplished and sought after landscape painters.
In Conversation
with John Gilboy:
John Gilboy: How do
you go about the business of making a picture?
James Naughton:
My studio is in the garden. I often work for long
uninterrupted stretches, normally about four hours
at a time. I work very intensively without interruption,
and like to carry on until I am satisfied with
an outcome. I get anxious if I have to leave the
studio before I have resolved what I am doing,
and I have to get back to see the thing through
to its conclusion. Usually the radio is on and
I nearly always listen to classical music or programmes
about current affairs and politics.
John Gilboy:
I am surprised that you don't work out in the
field, directly from nature?
James Naughton: Many
people say the same. Most are amazed that I do
not paint directly from nature. I don't work from
sketches or photographs either. It may seem odd
but in many ways I consider myself to be an abstract
painter. My images are suggested by the paint
itself, and I have no clear idea what will come
out of a session when I start.
John Gilboy:
What do you mean "the paintings come out
of the paint itself"?
James Naughton:
This is not an easy process to describe,
and in some ways I am reluctant to try, but essentially
it goes like this. I have my prepared surface,
my brushes and my oil paints. I am familiar and
comfortable with these materials. I have chosen
them because they suit me and I know how they
respond. Oil paint has certain characteristics
that other paints don't have. Mostly it has a
long open time, remains fluid and malleable. You
can use it thick or thin, push it around, it is
very organic and has a beautiful nature. So I
put some paint down, make some marks, break the
white surface and view the results. This process
continues in a feverish way until the paint itself
will suggest directions to me. Eventually clear
definable aspects of the composition are revealed,
but I am also searching to communicate the very
essence of light, how it travels, is absorbed,
its' warmth and the powerful emotional feelings
it provokes in us. This is where the process slips
away from my understanding, it's an elusive challenge,
but the depth and freedom of these creative experiences
justify all my fears and doubts at various stages
during the session.
John Gilboy:
You can only work on one image at a time
then?
James Naughton:
No, not always. With smaller works I
sometimes work simultaneously on two or three
in a single session. Working successively on a
number of paintings creates a fascinating dialogue
between each piece. This is something I used to
great success with the monoprints, while at college;
it was and still is a fantastic way to cultivate
a critical awareness in my work. If you set yourself
a task and reach one conclusion you can either
accept it or discard it. If you produce a number
of answers, a simple comparison will reveal the
most effective solution, and more importantly
what differentiates the quality of a good painting
from the less successful work. Working in series
also helps me achieve the strange balance of relaxation
and concentration needed to produce my paintings.
John Gilboy:
We have often talked in the past about
this state of freedom and release, a kind of intellectual
abandonment, where you give yourself over to the
workings of the sub-conscious mind. Poets talk
about the muse, and painters and composers often
talk about 'divine intervention' where they become
a conduit for some external creative influence.
Do you think you are any closer now to really
understanding how the process works and how your
pictures come out of it?
James Naughton:
Really difficult, this. A part of me doesn't really
want to examine it either. I'm a bit shy about
the whole thing in some ways, but I also think
that words are cumbersome and open to miss-interpretation.
I'm not sure that we always get any closer to
understanding by delving or describing.
I know that you believe that all experience and
emotion and knowledge is stored in the sub-conscious
and that elements from this store are released
at the point of creativity, when we attain conditions
of heightened concentration. You may be right,
but I wonder how you can be so sure of this, I
am not so sure and thrive on the uncertainty,
it sparks my imagination. Things that appear to
be completely lost to the conscious mind may be
unearthed and revealed in a painting in this way.
But what I produce can still seem completely unfamiliar
to me, as if it comes from somewhere else altogether.
For me the best art comes when I switch off my
yearning for conscious control, allow my sub-conscious
to just respond to the surface. There can be absolute
purity in this dialogue and that is when I make
my most honest work. It's amazing what you can
find when you aren't looking.
John Gilboy:
I understand now why you describe yourself
as an abstract painter, but your paintings are
nevertheless always about the landscape. The end
result isn't actually abstract in any conventional
meaning of the word at all. Isn't there a contradiction
here? Why does your response to the marks always
lead you in the same direction? One could reasonably
assume any number of conclusions given the nature
of your working practice?
James Naughton:
Again I am not entirely sure I know the answer
to this question. Maybe it comes out of insecurity,
or maybe it's just that I don't really like, or
feel comfortable with, art that is wholly abstract.
It will come as no surprise that Turner is one
of the painters I admire. There is a wonderful
playfulness in his painting, I delight in his
economy, figurative elements act as an anchor
and give us a reference point for the wonderfully
fresh marks. The beauty of this freedom in Turners
work is in how it manipulates our imagination
and emotions, so much work is left for us to do,
he doesn't patronise the viewer with explicit
descriptions and detail, instead he invites us
to communicate with the work completely.
For myself I have come to realise and accept that
I have a passion for nature. Every week I meander
through the same valley near my home, the surroundings
are unlike the sweeping views in my work but it
is the assimilation with nature which returns
with me to the studio. The walk is very familiar,
but also continually surprising. It is natural
for me to draw upon this passion in my work. Nature
is my reference point and when the marks present
themselves I always seem to interpret them as
motifs from the landscape. I follow my instincts
and feel comfortable in doing this. There are
passages in my work however which are extremely
abstract, where you can see really abandoned mark
making. Observers often comment on this. They
look closely at the surface and see how incredibly
loosely and freely the paint is applied, then
they stand back and everything somehow seems to
slot into place to reveal an extraordinarily realistic
landscape. I really enjoy this dichotomy. I still
allow myself the possibility that my marks will
lead to something quite different in the future,
who knows.
John Gilboy:
Nearly all of your paintings are characterised
by shafts of light breaking through clouds onto
an endless landscape. What's this all about….it's
almost biblical?
James Naughton:
On the one hand it is very simple. I've always
been fascinated by light. Even when I was a young
student making figurative prints I lit my subjects
very strongly. It is not really surprising that
it still comes through in my painting now. But
it is also true that my landscapes are nearly
always epic in theme, even when very small. There
is a sense that elemental forces are at work,
with huge clouds hanging over endless horizons,
sunlight emerging through the darkness. There
is no getting away from it because it always comes
through, and it obviously echoes what I might
describe as my own sense of religion, something
I feel most keenly when observing nature. And
my paintings do seem to evoke a strong emotional,
even spiritual, response in others, as if the
landscapes are somehow universal, rather than
depictions of place. But the less said about this
the better, really. I don't feel comfortable attaching
such definitive meaning to my paintings. I prefer
to think that the works need little in the way
of explanation, and I would not like my opinions
to disturb the fresh dialogue which a viewer will
hopefully enjoy.
John Gilboy:
Where does your painting go from here?
James Naughton:
I don't have a conscious plan, but my work does
change overtime in a quite natural way. When I
look back over just the last three years, for
example, I can see that my brush work has become
much more vigorous, there is more attack in the
work. My palette changes by degrees as well, nothing
dramatic, just small shifts over time. I am often
working on a much larger scale as well and this
in itself influences the way the paint goes down.
But change for me is organic. Considering the
way I work this almost has to be the case. I am
not driven by intellect, I follow the paint and
I expect that my work will change as I change,
as I mature and move through my life I will respond
in new ways. Maybe I will lose my dependence on
the landscape motif and move into complete abstraction,
maybe I will revert to figurative images. Let's
wait and see.
|