Every serious artist (I hope) wants to express their art in their own unique way. It often takes years to develop a personal way of ‘seeing’. Experimentation, curiosity and discovery go hand in hand as they take on their journey of creativity.
Some artists choose to work in a variety of mediums and this can result in a change of style from time to time. This could be because of the medium itself, the subject or the way they are ‘thinking’.
Not all artists respond this way. Some never change and just keep churning their work out.
I have changed my style 3 times over the past 30 years. My first style involved laying down strokes of coloured pencil, influenced by Post-Impressionist artists. I was also keen on Pointillism, (particularly the work of Seraut), a style that has recently attracted my attention once again. I’m keen to pursue this style further when I return home to Tasmania in March.
The second style (featured) is a lot freer and spontaneous. I went through a period in the 90s when I rejected the patient work that I had been labouring over for the previous 10 years. I mainly worked on white paper, something I rarely do today.
My current way of ‘seeing’ is my third style and is a cross between patterns, symbolism and abstraction with a taste of symbolism.
No, I’m not schizophrenic, I just to experiment now and then!
Today’s featured images are a taste of what I was doing in the early 90s. I didn’t sell all I drew, but I was pleased with what I did sell and the feedback I received. I was going through a pretty rough time in my personal life, and this style suited the way I felt. There’s a great deal of aggression in these drawings, but also a release, even in some, a sense of freedom. I wasn’t afraid to use outlines. Many of these drawings were quick and at times, spontaneous. These are drawings, not paintings as is my current practice.
There’s no harm in change, but it should be for the right reasons.
Richard
artkleko's Weblog 
Style is very important to an artist’s art work. It becomes their ‘brand’ that should be recognisable. I call it branding because at the upper strata of the commercial gallery system it’s about commodification of the artist and their work. But I suppose it’s not much different now to when Picasso, Rodin, Monet et al were art stars 100 or so years ago.
Personally I have experimented in many different styles and media and also subject matter over the years. This can be detrimental to my brand but at the risk of losing engagement in my work I have chosen to push the boundaries of what I can and can’t do. I started with figurative and landscape oil painting in the 1970s, then to acrylic, collage, printmaking, textile, then combining printmaking, textile and paint – then to ceramics combined with printmaking and painting and photography. The main disadvantage I find in changing medium and style too often is that commercial galleries like their artists to be committed to a series of work that is closely related in style, medium and subject matter. As a result I have organised my own exhibitions in galleries and belonged to quite a few diverse art groups and still enjoy experimentation.
The question I have often asked myself is what is my real style? The answer is usually that the medium dictates the way I apply myself. For example, my ceramic pieces are in 3D form and are also painted and decorated with embossing so there are two considerations of expression in style of form and decoration.
Thanks for your excellent comments Edna. There’s no doubt that the type of medium you employ, will influence your style.