Born in London in 1948, Nick Orsborn’s artistic career began when his poster-painting of a Virginia creeper was “heaped” with enthusiastic praise by his teacher when he was just nine years old. Osborn’s work is reminiscent, nostalgic almost, of bygone holidays, festivals and the bright, hot days of summer. He describes his work as “exuberant, colourful, sometimes humorous, sometimes ironic, but always optimistic!” His work is definitely celebratory, filled with colours and subjects that can’t help but distract our minds from the hustle, bustle and stress of everyday life. The gloomy, dismal, darker side of the world is eliminated from his work, but he claims that this was not a “decision” that he made. He claims he has never wished or tried to include the morbid and melancholic in his work, stating that “there’s enough suffocating Puritanism around already – there’s no need for me to waste my time and energy adding to it.”
Orsborn freely acknowledges his creative debt to artists such as Paul Klee, Picasso, Matisse and Hockney, all of whose influence are visible in much of his work, in the colours he uses and his overall philosophy and belief regarding art as entertainment and pleasure. Matisse once claimed of his own work: “In my paintings, I wish to create a spiritual remedy, similar to a comfortable armchair which provides rest from physical expectation for the spiritually working, the businessman as well as the artist.” On occasions, Osborn’s optimistic attitude has seen critics and writers describing his work as ‘lightweight,’ but, there are two sides to life; the good and the bad, and then there’s the rest in between. So why indeed can’t the good hold as much weight as the bad in the art world today?
Osborn’s works are predominantly watercolour paintings, with the odd oil painting thrown in for good measure. He co-founded Cicada Jewellery, with his ex-wife Pat Thornton, in 1973, where he made and sold hand cast resin earrings, brooches and necklaces. His creation of jewellery slowly wound down, along with his marriage, but he revived it again in 2003. He now “regards the resin jewellery as the three dimensional expression” of his work, and increasingly finds that “there are numerous crossover points” between his paintings and his jewellery. Orsborn was elected to the Membership of the Royal Institute of Painters in Watercolours in 2007.
In this interview, Orsborn discusses his work, his influences, and in a broader context, the role of the artist in society today and the possible crisis of the current art market.
Kate Davey: How do you think your practice of art has changed and evolved over the years?
Nick Orsborn: I think that years of experience of painting have deepened my understanding of my relationship between the abstract qualities of the medium (predominantly watercolour) and the ideas I am trying to express. As a figurative painter it has undoubtedly taken me a while to become aware of the deep difference between a ‘picture’ and a ‘painting,’ but at this stage in my life’s work I think I have come to an understanding of this, and hopefully my work is the better for it!
KD: What do you, as an artist, get from your work?
NO: Deep satisfaction when a painting (or a jewellery design!) works – and equally deep frustration when it doesn’t. I am a very stubborn person where my creativity is concerned and I will try and try again until I am happy with the outcome. I do not work to any absolute rules of composition, style, colour, content etc… I really believe each and every separate act of creation gives birth to its own rules which can be adhered to or discarded at will. That sounds like anarchy and it probably is – but I love it!
KD: And what do you hope your viewers get out of your art?
NO: In a word – pleasure. I don’t have any really specific intentions to convey; each painting is different – some have double meanings in their imagery, others are less concerned with image and more concerned with the abstract qualities of the medium – for me the act of painting is in itself the reason for painting. As to the viewer making their own interpretations – I think that is great – it means that in a silent and abstract way the painting itself, in the absence of the artist, has communicated with the observer. It really doesn’t matter if their interpretation is different to any feelings I may have for my work – the very fact of their interpretation means that their imagination has been activated – and that has to be a good thing!
KD: Moving on to the art world in a broader context, what role do you think the artist has in society today – has it changed since you first started practicing?
NO: I would say that artists today fulfil many roles – for some, their work stands as a comment or even a criticism of society, while some see their work as satisfying the desires and demands of particular sections of the public, and others (and I count myself as one of these) regard themselves as part of the entertainment business. The whole perception of ‘what is art?’ has changed in the past fifty years – many artists have abandoned traditional media in favour of performance and installation art – the creative use of film, video and computer generated expression has increased dramatically, and even as a practitioner of a fairly conventional medium – paint – I nevertheless applaud many of these innovative approaches to creativity and the expression of concepts and ideas.
KD: So, finally, what is your opinion of the future of art, and of the art market?
NO: Art has to have a future in any civilised society. In all its varied aspects it represents the trials and triumphs of humanity against the dead hand of social and religious bigotry, hatred, conflict and ignorance. Whatever form Art takes in the future it should contribute to a greater understanding of the human condition and our relationships with a universe of which we are all an indivisible part. As for the future of the Art Market – it must, in my opinion, stop being the preserve of an elitist few – a playground for wealthy and cynical speculators, who, to quote Oscar Wilde “know the price of everything and the value of nothing.” It must broaden its horizons and become much more inclusive of humanity at large – this will require considerable effort not only on the part of arts administrators but also artists themselves – perhaps there have been a few gleams of light recently – I’m thinking of the runaway success of Tate Modern. Much more needs to be done to promote all manifestations of art to the greatest number of people and to see them respond with enthusiasm and imagination. I think it will come to pass – but then I’m an optimist – the bottle is always half-full, never half-empty – even when I’ve drunk it dry!
So, as Osborn quite rightly muses, “the future is unknown, the past is gone. There is only the constantly moving dot of existence which we call now.” His views of the art world today hold true with many of his contemporaries; the expansion of the market to a wider audience is much needed. Art is a form of expression, a show of ideas and concepts, an invitation for interpretation, and why shouldn’t everyone be invited to express and interpret something that is fundamentally based in the roots of our society, of our everyday life? Running small Open Art Houses in the Brighton area (his current one is being held throughout December), Orsborn is doing just this, by enabling a wider variety of people to have access to art.
Regarding his own future as an artist, Osborn explains “there are some ideas brewing in my brain to do with making sculptural paintings out of work on paper – a kind of mad origami – but who knows?!”
