by Steve Williams

Created on: February 11, 2009   Last Updated: February 21, 2009

Because they can.

And with that, I would have ended it. And with that, the journey begins, in this my first publication, with what would be a violation of at least two of the standards that guide us, the use of proper grammar, spelling and punctuation, and the 400 word minimum. And if a comparison were to be drawn between the artist and the writer would it then be in violation of number nine, to stay on track? Or is it not the same question for both, the question of how far can we go? But for the writer, how bare would our shelves of the classics become if we only allowed those works created completely with proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation? Here I speak of a sentence fragment. How much more marvelously and succinctly Sir Winston Churchill addressed the nature of grammar rules, "From now on, ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put." For the artist, perhaps it would be more compelling, and revealing, to ask why they "can't" seem to be satisfied painting models with their privates private?

Does a completely disrobed model reveal more about the subject of the painting, or the condition of the soul of the artist who paints her? Some have argued everything a man does in a relationship with a woman is motivated by the desire to see her naked. If this is not at the core of the question here, then why is it these same fine artists appear clothed in their self-portraits? Apparently, what is good for the gander is good for the goose, except when applied in like manner. Is that what it means to invoke an artistic license, to apply the rules as they benefit the artist? Whistler (thankfully) managed to capture his mother's beauty without undressing her, and yet Wyeth was incapable of doing the same? Or, which came first, the nude model or the mistress?

As the saying goes, "proper tool, proper job," but who has not used a door jamb to open a beer bottle or the back of a crescent wrench to hammer in a nail? The ideal is ideal, but not always practical. And so, sometimes less than ideal is exactly what is called upon to portray what is real. For a writer, sometimes a sentence fragment is sufficient to meet the task and anything more is excess and just that many words. For an artist, the noble defense offerings of their ability to portray beauty or to evoke a reaction only offer a misty haze through which breaks the question's simple but fragmented reality.

Because they can.

Learn more about this author, Steve Williams.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.