Art Re-Education Revisited

I’ve been thinking about that phrase.

A few years ago, while attending Friends General Conference, I took a Zentangle workshop. Part of my interest was practical. As a teacher, I was always looking for things I could bring back to my students. At the same time, I was doing some spiritual searching of my own.

When I retired, my intention was simple. I thought I would return to the work I had left behind years earlier when I completed my MFA. While teaching, my focus had been on technology, my students, and teaching itself. I assumed I would pick up where my thesis left off and continue from there.

I did return to my thesis and to its central ideas: how perception and physiology affect our vision of reality.

What I discovered, however, was that too much had changed. The media I was working with had changed. My interests had changed. Instead of continuing where I left off, I found myself asking some of the same questions I had wrestled with in graduate school.

What is my art about?

What am I trying to say?

And what medium is best suited to saying it?

At some point, I began to wonder if I was engaged in a kind of re-education.

Looking back at those early pieces now, I can see that many of them focused on value, texture, repetition, and mark-making. At the time, I didn’t really realize what I was exploring, but now they feel a bit like exercises in learning how to see and do again. To me, that’s my art re-education.

What I do know is that one thing kept leading to another.

A drawing would spark an idea for the next drawing, and little by little my curiosity carried me beyond the boundaries of Zentangle itself. Questions about line and pattern turned into questions about color, surface, and different ways to make marks.

Before I knew it, ink led to watercolor, watercolor led to gouache, gouache led to colored pencil, digital work, and eventually oil paint.

The recent exhibition at Collective Z feels like a milestone along that path. With the show entering its final week, I’ve found myself taking a breath and wondering what comes next.

And perhaps that’s the point: I’m still asking questions.

I’m not sure where the path leads from here, but I’m still eager to follow it.


“Art does not reproduce what we see. It makes us see.”

— Paul Klee

Making Meaning

How do I map meaning before words arrive?

Abstract black-and-white drawing filled with symbolic marks, looping lines, geometric forms, arrows, and maze-like patterns exploring thought, language, and the process of making meaning.
Making Meaning — Opening a Sketchbook, 2026.

I think that’s it.

Finding my way in.

Then starting to move about the page. Finding another opening. Seeing a shift, a row, an arrow, a direction. Then each line takes shape and organizes itself, much like this drawing was created.

That’s how my brain functions.
That’s how I find meaning.

I’ve always seen relationships first — patterns, structures, connections between things.

This drawing feels connected to that.

It’s built on patterns, and the patterns shift from one system to another — repeating, evolving, reorganizing themselves across the page. In some ways, it reminds me of my Words I Cannot Read series on ArtChangesLives(Dot)Com — fragmented letterforms and systems that almost make sense, carrying meaning even before I fully understand them.

Eventually, the structure loosens, and at the top a small figure appears, waving, greeting, almost as if it has emerged from the system itself.

For me, these drawings are not illustrations after thought.

They are part of the thinking.


 

Serious Play, Solemn Play

Abstract pen and ink drawing inspired by serious play vs solemn play, with flowing maze-like lines and a central vertical form exploring movement, balance, and the space between.
Pen and Ink | The Space Between — 5 × 5 in

Walking Reflection — April 17, 2026 Serious Play, Solemn Play

Years ago, I showed my students at Minneapolis College (MCTC) a video by Paula Scher on serious play vs. solemn play, and I find myself returning to that idea again.

“Serious play is about letting go and allowing things to happen. Solemn play is about controlling the outcome.” — Paula Scher

Years ago, I showed my students at Minneapolis College (MCTC) a video by Paula Scher on serious play vs. solemn play, and I find myself returning to that idea again.

At the time, I understood it pretty simply. Serious play felt open and exploratory, a place where not knowing was part of the process. Solemn play felt heavier, more controlled—something that closed things down.

But now I see it differently.

I think solemn play comes after serious play. Serious play is where things begin—where something opens, and I don’t quite know what I’m doing yet. But then something starts to form. A shape, a direction, a presence begins to emerge.

That’s where solemn play enters. It feels more like a kind of holding. A kind of listening. A willingness to stay with what’s emerging without trying to resolve it. It requires attention.

It’s almost like the kernel forms in serious play, but it begins to take root in solemn play.

Maybe the movement isn’t one or the other. It feels more like a quiet rhythm back and forth—between letting go and staying present, between discovery and care.

Where I am now isn’t about trying to get back to serious play.

It’s about learning how to remain in that space where something begins to take shape,

and then… the conversation begins.

When Is a Work of Art Finished

Walking Reflection — April 14, 2026
When is The Work Finished?

Door05192024, Mixed Media, Pen and Digital, when is a work of art finished doorway artwork
Door-05192024, Mixed Media, Pen and Digital, Hendricks 2024

“The work is done when it has nothing more to say to you.”
Robert Rauschenberg

I made an appointment to have ten pieces framed — thinking about when a work of art is finished.

And then I canceled it.

At first, I thought I had chickened out.
That I didn’t have the courage to follow through and see how they are received.

But the more I sat with it, the more I realized — that wasn’t quite it.

I’m not ready to separate myself from the work.

Not because I’m afraid of losing it,
but because it doesn’t feel concluded in the way framing suggests.

When I imagine putting the pieces behind glass, something in me tightens.

And right now, they don’t feel done.

They still feel open and accessible.

They’re still in conversation with me —
and I haven’t figured out their path. Maybe there isn’t.

If they’re framed and set aside, even carefully, they become removed.
Not just physically, but creatively.

And maybe that’s what I was really responding to.

Not fear of letting go —
but resistance to closing something that’s still open.

There’s a kind of pressure in making art to declare things finished.
To move them forward.
To let them go.

But sometimes the more honest thing
is to stay with the work a little longer.

<nbsp;>

See more in Walking Reflections.

Presence Without Witness

Abstract watercolor of a fragmented head with window-like compartments and circular mechanical forms, suggesting shadowed urban architecture.
Tenement-02172026-watercolor

Lately I’ve been thinking about what remains of us.

Not reputation.
Not a big story.
Not even the full face.

Just trace.

A shadow on concrete isn’t the person, but it proves something stood in the light.

I keep circling the idea that existence doesn’t require constant visibility. When awareness drops away — sleep, silence, the spaces between — there isn’t spectacle. There isn’t narrative. And yet something remains.

Maybe that’s what a shadow is.

Not the full reality.
Not the whole person.
Just proof that contact happened. That light met form.

Not monument.

Existence.

A human being is only breath and shadow.                                                           ~ Sophocles