I want to relate something that happened before I hung my show Stolen Culture in my Gallery. The day of the hanging, I looked at all the traditional work that was then on the walls and I was struck by a feeling. It struck me that all the work I have been doing for forty eight years was painted for my peers. For all the California painters I was trying to impress. In the course of learning to paint, I have been painting for them. For My teachers, family and everyone else. Subconsciously for my parents.
The work for Stolen Culture and the upcoming show Matriarch's is all work I did for myself. For no other reason than to make art that spoke to me.   This move into a contemporary realm, I discovered, is my future as an artist. This may also be an effect of coming here to New Mexico to work. I feel I am really painting now. I am tapping into my own style. My own way. I have, after all these years started painting differently. More expressively.  I live a secluded life. Few friends or acquaintances I hang with. This leaves me a lot of time to think about my work. I don't go out or socialize much.   I feel I have now cut a cord to traditional painting and discovered who I am as a painter.
I know this sounds crazy, but when making all these paintings, I had a clearer sense that the work had little to do with my past work or what others would think of it.
I know without all my early training and hard work to learn to paint, this new work would not have happened. Now I am exploring new techniques and ways to paint. To make images that have more to do with the work than to impress. To say something with this new work. They are not just pictures painted for friends and family or my peers anymore. Leaving the influences of all the artists I love and admire, here in New Mexico, I seem to have discovered myself as an artist. I have tapping into a part of me I didn't know existed. My own way for myself. I am telling you this because, if you stay alert and keep pursuing and looking forward, it is possible to change and more importantly grow as an artist. It was a risk, but a risk I needed to take or stay in the past and make more of the same and feel I never measured up to all those who were so influential in my education, growth and style. 
When I paint now, there is a freedom I feel that has no attachment to what I have been doing. All I can say is I am at a point where I am my own painter. Creating something more personal to me sans any traditional influences. And my painting style is still evolving because of the Stolen Culture pieces. In fact it has led to painting an additional group of newer works for another show.
Being here and having largely been left alone by others I have known, I have become a better painter. I can say that now and I am looking forward, at age seventy five, to creating better work. My own work.
Being an artist, I am an outsider. Ultimately, all artists are outsiders. I feel I have moved forward in ability, knowledge, technique and skill level and I am anxious to paint. Please understand I am not bragging here. And it has not gone to my head. The purpose of painting has just become clearer to me. Many things are becoming clearer by being here and painting these two shows.
The article in the Local paper has caused people who talk to me and come and take notice. Before this show I had my doubts and seriously questioned my ability to say something new and interesting. I was afraid all my best work was behind me. But I know now all the work I have done was my training and education for now. For today and the rest of my time as a painter. This may not make sense to you. It is hard to find the words to express my feelings fully.
I guess the point I am making is never give up. Never think you can't improve. There is always the possibility you can learn more. You can do better work. If you hit an impasse, stop and give yourself a breather. Re-evaluate your entire process. Stop painting for others. Paint for yourself.  I wanted to share these thoughts with you.

Artists operate under a different set of circumstances and all of them affect h/his work. Illiterate societies used art to appease their gods, or ensured fertility and frighten their enemies. All through the use of art. Renaissance artists had to please either the Church, rich patrons, or both. Korean artists had compelling nationalistic reasons to distinguish their art from Chinese art. Modern artists explored new ways of seeing even while a world war raged in Europe and a depression hit America. Contemporary artists are every bit as creative, and also need to balance creativity with commerce.   Art history is not just about drawing, painting, and sculpture. You will also run across architecture, photography, film, mass media, the performing arts.  Installations, animation, videos, landscape and decorative arts like furniture, ceramics, woodworking, goldsmithing, and so much more. If someone created something worth seeing art history will present it to you.
Let's not forget studying art history also requires analysis, critically thinking and yes, writing. Spelling will come into play and you cannot escape research and sourcing.  Think about the amount of visual stimulation we are bombarded with on a daily basis. You are probably reading this on your computer monitor, smartphone, iPad or tablet.
And though we may not appreciate it, mathematics. measurements. We have all heard of the Golden Section, Thirds, proportion, scale.   As a species, we are shifting from predominantly verbal thinking to visual thinking. Learning is becoming more visual and less text-oriented; this requires us to respond not just with analysis or memorization, but also with informed emotional insight.
It is the most human thing imaginable to want to know about our ancestors, the people who made us who we are. What did they look like? How did they dress? Where did they gather, work, and live? All this is a part of Art history.
Then there is also photography which has been around less than 200 years. Film is even more recent, and digital images are relative newcomers. If we want to see any person that existed prior to these technologies we must rely on an artist.
Art history informs us about ourselves. The history of Art reflects the way we once lived, how and what we thought and the many ways we expressed ourselves. Without this history, and the knowledge of artists who came before we might well be coming out of the dark ages.

My current show Stolen Culture at the studio is coming to a close shortly. I wanted to spend a bit of time reflecting on it and the effects it had not only on me but those who came to see it and relate these thoughts to you.
First, these works were a complete change of style from my normal way of painting.
Trained in a traditional method my first thought was I wanted the works to speak to today. Take an idea and bring it forward in time. Two things needed to happen.
Second, I had to do these pieces differently. They needed to be done in a "contemporary modern" way. I say this because I felt western paintings and Indian paintings in particular have been painted in a dry formal way for a very long time. In order for the public to " see" Indians and what I want to portray anew, I needed a different way to paint these for proper attention and impact. For viewers to see past what they assumed about Indian paintings and see this issue fresh. The viewer had to see with new eyes, so to speak.
Third, and this was the most difficult thing to overcome, I had to change my style and method of painting. I had to leave my comfort zone and attempt to work in a way that was unfamiliar to me. I had to take what I have learned and incorporate that knowledge into new unchartered territory for me as a painter.
I spent a long time researching, looking at contemporary works while researching and learning Indian culture and historical works on Indians. Over time I noticed I was not connecting with anything I saw. I didn't see anything that related to a way of telling their story in paintings or a way to accomplish it. I doubted my ability to do these paintings in a new, authentic, exciting way.
I eventually stopped looking at everything. I made five small exploratory works. In that process the idea finally came to me and I moved to a larger piece and I figured out how I wanted these paintings to look. Now, I had it and in an untried style I came feel very comfortable with and continue with today.  The resulting twenty one paintings exceeded my expectations. To relay to you here the experience of painting these works; discovery of the knowledge I gained not only about painting, but further understanding of myself and my ability and the creative process in general as well as Indian Culture overall would take volumes.
The many people who have seen these works and positively responded made me realize that we as artists must always change and try and move forward. Attempt ideas in which we have little experience. Risk failure. Take chances. Be more fearless. On this road, while we deviate, we discover things many never get to experience and the process of painting becomes spiritual, more personal and expressive in ways we have yet to encounter.
As a footnote Stolen Culture has spurred additional thoughts and I created a follow up show or what I consider a coda to the original if you will. I hope to exhibit Matriarch's; twenty two new contemporary, work in time for Love Of Art Month in February 2020 in Las Cruces.

I am going to mention a few actual art styles in no particular order- here goes-
Abstract, photorealistic, new-realistic, expressionistic, abstract expressionistic, Modernist, romantic, folk, minimalist, post-modern, pop, art nouveau, surrealist, symbolist, dada, precisionist, cubism, portraIture, form art, non-objective, contemporary, fauve, impressionist, post-impressionist, realist, representational...and on and on.
So here is my question? How many of these styles could you recognize if you saw them all together. One or two? Three at the most? Further, could you differentiate between them? Can you identify all these styles if you saw the works? I know, myself, I would have difficulty. In the end, does it really matter from the point of appreciation?
Realistically, you would look at the work and either like it or not - regardless of whether you could identify the style in which it was painted.
You have no knowledge of how it was painted or if it was good, bad or painted with any skill at all. You are then free to respond to it based purely on like or dislike. So, technically, the style is not important. Nor the person or period in which it was painted. You respond to the work only. You are not influenced by any period or artist who created it. Sound good?
So why do we get all caught up with "Labels"? Why does each generation malign the art of the previous generations labels? Well, I can bore you many reasons but my point is - what is important is that the work speaks to you and that you would spend money to own it.
Many, many great artists have passed on, or have their work in private collections, museums, or plaster ceilings and walls. So why is it so expensive and out of reach of the ordinary art lover? I will give you one reason only. They aren't making anymore and more people want it. There are just so many works to go around from the great, dead artists. So the price goes through the roof.
The basic reason we need to know a period or style is purely academic to identify when and why a style originated. For historic purposes and general art knowledge, which I promote. But today artists are mixing and matching styles. Adding some new things leaving out some old things. That is what art does. Reinvents itself every so often. So forget the labels. Appreciate and buy what you like.
There is an artist living now, today, whose work is soaring in price and no one knows who he is. What I mean is no has ever seen him but we know his name and identify his work when we see it? His name is Banksy. That's it. Banksy. Strange isn't it? He goes around, usually at night, clandestinely, stencils his work onto buildings, brick walls, fences, sidewalks; any surface anywhere and everywhere and has reached such fame people are now stealing them. His "style"' if you can call it a style was officially once classified as Graffiti. Now, due to his notoriety, his style has been upgraded to Street Art. And many want it enough to also go out, at night, and steal it. Because of all this, prices for his work is climbing - rapidly. And we still don't know who he is. All true.
The point I am making is do we need labels at all. Why not just create well painted and well presented works without calling it anything related to any style?  For instance have a show and advertise it as the current NO STYLE  ART!
Okay, a better name needs to be imagined, but this new term of Contemporary Art actually encompasses all styles. Artists are now free to paint in any way they like. Style is an attempt but artists today to sell a "new" art to the public. It is a conglomeration of everything we have seen in the past with some new things we haven't seen. The word contemporary covers everything. Every past style lumped together and given a new 'coat of paint' - sorry I couldn't resist the pun.