This is a one shot painting. That means I made it in one day, in one sitting. So when I look at this picture and think about what I can say about it, I remember that particular day.
It was sometime in early spring where the leaves had not come out yet but many of the trees had blossoms on them. I love that time of year- bare trees, pine trees, and flowering trees! There is nothing quite like a tree covered in flowers- for me it’s like food for the eyes.
Anyways, I went to a little park near my house. There is a corner of that park where the grass is always more green than the other grass in the park. I have often wondered if there is a spring underground there. I set up on the extra green grass under a large cedar tree and looked at the hilltop in front of me.
I wanted to paint the large tree on the hilltop that I looked at every day on my walks with the dog. It’s funny though, I started working in the background and realized that the composition did not ask for the large tree at all! This has happened to me many times. I start a picture with a particular subject in mind and that subject does not end up in the picture!
My husband likes to say “it’s not the pieces, it’s the arrangement” to just about any situation. In this case I agree with him. The arrangement of the shapes in the landscape around the large tree was what my subconscious was attracted to - not so much the tree itself!
I wonder if it’s good to make paintings incomplete in this way - without the star of the show. What if the star of the show is a sort of emptiness? What if a painting is an empty bowl for the viewer to fill however one sees fit?