Patrick Piccinelli
A painter whose creative process of making art is like jazz improvisation
Your paintings often combine structured geometric elements with organic, abstract strokes; how do you find the balance?
I always start with a minimal geometric structure. At this stage, I work on the composition formally and chromatically until I am happy with the whole. When this stage is complete, I look at the painting for a while, mentally projecting a trace, splashes, stains or lines drawn on the composition.
Then comes the (perilous!) moment when I realize what I have imagined. Of course, the trace, the stains, and the lines must upset and disturb the composition, but simultaneously, they must establish a harmonious visual dialogue.
You compared your process of making paintings to composing jazz music; when did jazz start to influence your practice?
I discovered contemporary jazz when I was about 16 years old. At that time, I was drawing and painting, and I was already planning to go to art school (I studied at ECAL, the University of Art and Design in Lausanne, Switzerland). Musicians like the Art Ensemble of Chicago, Keith Jarrett, Miles Davis, and Herbie Hancock influenced me by their great creative freedom. They are great musicians and virtuosos, but they are not afraid to break or revisit the codes.
Therefore, I can say that jazz influenced me at a very young age, precisely when I discovered the practice and experimentation of art.
Watching you paint in your videos is a visual treat. It looks like jazz improvisations. We can not predict what you will do next. Do you ever compose a painting in your mind first or decide the colour palette?
The whole research phase involves multiple studies in small formats on paper. However, I always reserve the freedom to deviate from the project during the final realization stage.
Are you usually satisfied with the results?
As I base my work on small-format studies, I am usually satisfied with the results. However, I sometimes modify works that I consider finished (in some cases, I modify them after months of completing the painting).
Can you say that your creative process has evolved with time? If so, has this change led to a change in your painting styles?
My creative process is constantly “in motion.” The act of painting motivates me, and I cannot repeat a modus operandi over a long period. One could say that my style evolves with my pictorial research and experimentation.
Can one explain an art piece, be it its creator or the audience?
I teach (with great joy) visual arts, and yes, I think it is possible to explain
a work of art. But for me, intuitive understanding, the intelligence of the heart, and emotions are paramount. So my students know that it is not the speech about their creations that will impress me but the purely visual impact of their achievements!
I love contemporary art and work personally and with my students in this direction. However, too often, in contemporary practice, the discourse around the work is more interesting than the work itself, which is often weak in its formal and plastic expression.
