McDonald's Delivers and The Red Panda Effect

The world has changed. But, then again, the world has always changed.

Have you ever seen a very funny video of a red panda (apparently at a zoo) who appears to be very startled when he comes out of his living quarters and sees a new rock in his enclosure? That cute little guy represents all of us. ANTIME something is added, taken away, or changed we stand up and take notice.

Have you seen any movies recently that were made in, let's say, the 1990s? The obvious changes in our world since then are the cars and the hair and clothing fashions. Perhaps the most obvious change from then to now, however, is the use of pay telephones. Our little phones have made so many changes in our lives it would make a red panda either giddy with joy or petrified with fear (I really can't tell if the red panda in that video is happy or frightened).

McDonald's is less than a mile from my home. If I want to partake in any of their offerings I could easily walk there. But NOW there is a sign on the window of the restaurant that says McDonald's Delivers! What? When? How? How much will this new service cost me? Who delivers one-dollar cheeseburgers? REALLY? Can we talk about this? And don't get me started with the URBAN delivery! REALLY? A guy on a bicycle is going to carry food across town in the rain?

Okay, don't panic. This blog post is NOT about McDonald's delivering. It is about change.

I will leave it up to you to decide which changes are for the good of humankind and which changes are for the bad. Some are obvious others are not.

See the painting I posted? It is titled "McDonald's Delivers." It was one of my first attempts at creating a painting in a very loose impressionistic style. Painting that way was a change for me. Most of my art has always been more on the realism side of things. I get lots of nice compliments on my realism work but, to be honest, I feel like I'm simply recreating a photo. Even if I set up the easel and paint "en plein air" and the result is realistic looking I get that imposter syndrome I've read about. So making a change to impressionism was a big change for me.

My partner, Robin MacBlane, is a master at impressionism. She doesn't seem to know it, but she is. So is her mother so I guess you could say she gets it naturally. Working alongside Robin all these years has helped show me the beauty of painting in a "painterly" way. Show the brush strokes, lay the paint on thick, exaggerate the colors, let the paint brush flow, and, most importantly, MAKE A PAINTING!

Old habits die hard, though. So my attempts at painting in an impressionistic way has always been tempered or tainted or influenced by my own tendencies to want to "make it look real."

I'm sure you've seen the early works of Claude Monet, Mary Cassatt, or Vincent Van Gogh. Their early works clearly were more realistic than they were impressionistic. And, of course they were. Photography was either non-existent or in its infancy (depending on which artist we are studying) so making a painting as realistic as possible was very desirable. And when impressionism was in its early years it was horribly criticized. In fact, and this is ironic, the name of the style "impressionism," became popular after a scathing review by an art critic who attended an art show.

That critic was Louis Leroy who, in 1874 in the magazine Le Charivari, wrote “Impression! Wallpaper in its embryonic state is more finished!" after looking at Impression Sunrise, by Claude Monet. And art critic Albert Wolff, critiquing Camille Pissarro, wrote, "Try to make Monsieur Pissarro understand that trees are not violet, that sky is not the color of fresh butter” adding “try to explain to Monsieur Renoir (Pierre-Auguste Renoir) that a woman’s torso is not a mass of decomposing flesh with those purplish-green stains”.

Oy.

Fortunately, for me, when I first posted "McDonald's Delivers" the "red panda" effect on Facebook was much kinder. Those who expected my art to be realistic and beautiful stood at attention (like that little red panda) and took note of the change but they weren't unkind. I was glad of that, too. But, of course, I have those impressionists before me to thank. Had I lived in their day I may have feared for my life (or at least my livelihood).

The conclusion to all of this is that it is okay to try something different. It is okay to bend the rules. If nobody ever attempted to change anything we'd still be riding horses, or still be fetching water from the creek, or (God forbid) still using pay phones!

Of course it is ALSO okay to stick with tradition. Who wouldn't want to paint like Rosa Bonheur? (Check out her horses in "The Horse Fair")

And, a quick note to critics. Instead of paintings, however, I'll use music to make my point. It is probably a more relatable art form in today's world than paintings are. Rap, hip-hop, jazz, rock-and-roll, and even baroque were all dismissed as NON-MUSIC by their critics. In the publication Mercure de France in May 1734 a critic complained that the baroque style "lacked coherent melody, was filled with unremitting dissonances, constantly changed key and meter, and speedily ran through every compositional device." Sound familiar?

At 66 years old I am like the old dog trying to learn new tricks. But I didn't invent the tricks so maybe that's what makes it easier for me.

But if you are a young artist and your music or your paintings or your dance style or your writing or film making push against the so-called "status quo" then keep on doing what you are doing. The world will be a better place for it.

My proof? McDonald's delivers!