THE CASE FOR DUMPING BROWN

When someone begins to study the work of various artists, it quickly becomes apparent that most artists favor a particular palette of colors. Color is as much a part of an artist's signature as are certain symbols or objects to which an individual artist gravitates. A chosen color or range of colors is often as distinct to a particular artist, as some of the general themes that continue to crop up in his or her work. Considering the title of this entry, you might already correctly surmise that I love bright, saturated colors. No drab adobes or washed-out pastels for me! I find tan and beige lackluster, along with the entire range of what are collectively called "earth tones."

When I stop to think about it, I realize that certain colors have always appeared in my work on an instinctive level as well. I especially love three of the tertiary colors more than all the others. I have no idea why. I just do. Moreover, I've gravitated toward these same colors since I was a child. For instance, I find bright yellow-orange captivating (not orange mind you but orange mixed with yellow). I also have an affection for intense blue-greens, a.k.a. "teal" (also an in-between mix of primary and a secondary colors). Finally, rounding out this group is a vibrant red-violet. Curiously, the other tertiaries; yellow-green, red-orange and blue-violet, hold no special attraction. On a more sombre note, the darker colors towards which I gravitate are just as saturated but no less distinct in their own way; although none are brown. I also prefer colors in the "midnight" range over a neutral black. The midnight versions of Prussian blue or Cordovan seem appealing as does a Charleston green but never brown! I've noticed I'm apt to select a range of particular primary and secondary colors depending on the subject matter. While I'm not much of a fan of other earth tones, brown in particular holds a special status in color aversion and avoidance.

Let's face it, it's hard to make ocher, tan or sepia interesting. When I think about brown; dirt, mud, clay, silt, dust, peat bogs and the like come to mind. The darker a brown gets the more dismal it seems; regardless of its chromatic designation as umber, cafe noir, mahogany, chestnut or burnt sienna, On the other hand, the lighter browns tend towards the insipid: whether tan, taupe or beige. While the color of a milkshake, complete with cherry on top evokes pleasant memories, the thought of putting this color on a wall makes me shudder!

Many years ago, when I began taking a course in neon sculpture, as we considered a myriad of seemingly endless color choices produced by the glowing phosphors used in conjunction with neon and argon gas, professor James White announced: "There is only one color that can't be produced with neon and that is brown. You cannot make make brown neon!" "Well there you go," I thought, that's just one more point to add to the long list of my reasons for disliking brown. As might be imagined, my dislike of brown makes me no great fan of the so-called Flemish Masters either. I find the earthy tones that characterize their paintings morose and dingy. In like manner, late-nineteenth century Victorian decor is not much better; nor are their paintings something to write home about, though I must admit I admire their range of sombre mossy greens. There is far too much color in the world and too many color possibilities to settle for the dreary brown of muddy water, dead leaves, dirt, dried plants or any of the other choices from which brown stems.

Years ago, when a proper British friend of mine, first crossed the threshold of my living room, he audibly gasped. It was not a gasp of admiration. It was one of shock and dismay. True to form, my walls were blue-green, yellow-orange and red-violet. In addition, all my furniture was red! My choice of colors it seemed, had thoroughly offended his British sensibilities; however I took it as a complement, which is probably the reason I vividly remember the incident. Some time later, after submitting pieces to an art show, another artist remarked, "Your work reminds me of The Memphis Group, It's not the same but it has some distinct similarities." "What's The Memphis Group I asked?" In answer, he brought up pictures of their work on his cell phone. After seeing their work for the first time, I immediately responded: "I want one of those and one of those and one of those;" a reaction which certainly shows a sympathetic relational bond. Up until that moment I wasn't aware that a "Memphis Group" existed. I'd certainly never seen any of their work before. One undeniable characteristic of Memphis, are the bright, saturated colors that define their style. Definitely no brown there!

Decor at this point seems to have recently gone through another morose tailspin. First there was "Tuscany" with its bloated and overstuffed furniture, sporting an endless range of earth tones. Those who latched onto this trend, seem to equate its overbearing size with a ponderous sense of "opulence;" misguided though this association with "opulence" seems to be. While Victorian colors tended towards the dark and heavy, at least they occasionally used bright color (if sparingly and in dollops) to brighten their otherwise dreary surroundings! Tuscany, on the other hand, has all of the monochromatic verve of a washed-out sepia photograph.

Having passed beyond the boundaries of "Tuscany," we've now fallen into the throes of "The Aged Look" (as it's being called). This "look," fostered by Restoration Hardware, is sometimes called the "Restoration Hardware Look," which they tell me is "composed of layered neutral tones" This reminds me of the range of colors (if "colors" these can be called) displayed by bleached bones scattered through the expanse of a tar pit. "Dank" and dismal" seems to be the hallmark here! I'm also told that "Restoration Hardware is the world's leading luxury home furnishings purveyor . . ." How you get "luxury" out of an interior that displays all of the intensity of a sensory deprivation chamber I don't know but that seems to be the claim. Rooms done in this style have taken on the sombre overtones found in the somnolent depths of some gothic vampire's dungeon Of course, not surprisingly all of this decor is definitely "brown" heavy. That's why I hate it so.

Let's face it! Color makes a statement! The bolder and brighter a color, the more it calls attention to itself. A color definitely reflects the sensibility and taste of the person who selected it. I'm convinced that the scrutiny and undue attention invited by bright colors makes the nouveau riche unduly nervous. I think those aspiring to pretense, who at the same time fear they lack taste, are terrified by intense colors lest these call attention to their lack of insight and inexperience with taste in general. Those in this category (of which there are many), leave it up to someone else to make their "taste" statements for them preferably in a not-too-ostentatious or over-the-top manner. This has resulted in an aversion and avoidance of color that has issued in our current crop of Browns & Drabs. The "brown" of today has taken the place of the beige of yesteryear. Brown is safe, staid, and bland. It doesn't stand out. It blends in with the woodwork and passes the muster of inquiring eyes because there is nothing much to see. Moreover, for the most part, all browns tend to complement one another. No in-depth color decisions are necessary! No nightmares about color choices present themselves. No fears arise that color choices might not match, or shades might go "off" against one another. No searching questions occur in regard to "picking the right color" or whether chosen colors go together. No problems with mixing and matching here! Nothing to cause upset or rock the boat. Bland has become the order of the day!

I recently came across a lengthy apologia; an "ode to brown" if you will, published in an online food magazine. Entitled: Why Brown is the Bold Neutral Your Walls Need. I like the use of the words "bold neutral" here; frankly I'd translate it as just plain "blah." The author of this article proceeds to wax panegyric about the way in which brown color reminds her of various delectable foods. From my perspective, no matter how you try to sweeten the connection between brown and confection; whether chocolate, mocha or fudge; brown is still brown! I'm in complete agreement with one aspect of her argument however, brown is something you eat - the umami of a rich brown gravy - a sizzling char-broiled steak - a steaming cup of hot cocoa - after which the ensuing residue is appropriately flushed. You don't sit and stare at brown, you quickly dispatch it in one way or the other. It's in the recesses of the mouth that "brown" manifests its savory magic, not as a color on your wall! Brown is to be savored not watched!

As if to convince herself of the legitimacy of this new-found affinity for brown, the author begins to drop the names of numerous professionals who enthusiastically endorse the latest trend of brown-vironment as chic and enticing; to which I unapologetically respond, "the world is full of dubious options, regardless of whether they issue from "professionals" or as twittering from the "peanut gallery."

Were I to include a galvanized, chicken-wire nod to Johanna Gaines or add a Restoration touch to any of my work it would be as a tongue-in-cheek, flippant aside to low camp. But even acknowledging this possibility, I still couldn't be induced to include brown! As an epitaph to brown, along with its decorative cousins' tan and beige; all I can say is that I hope the current fascination with this "color" passes quickly. As Generation Z begins to come into its own, I hope for the promised restoration of bright colors and a speedy recovery of decor!

Let me reiterate in no uncertain terms, just for the record - I hate brown!!!