Retouching a ten-year-old still life and the new mark is too young
I pulled an old still life out of the rack this week. Pears on a copper pot, I painted it around 2015, and it always bothered me that the far edge of the pot went dead. Hard line, no atmosphere. So I set up to retouch it, scraped just that passage down, and repainted it.
Now the problem is the mark itself. The new paint is confident, it turns, it sits in the light the way it should. But next to the older paint it looks young. You can feel the ten years in the difference. My hand is not the same hand. The retouch is technically better and it does not belong to the painting.
I know there are ways to age a surface, varnish layers, glazes. But that's cosmesis. The real question is whether you can put a new mark into an old painting and have it be honest, or whether it always stays a transplant.
I left it half done. Not sure I want to finish.
2
4commentsSaveFollow threadShare
the "technically better" part is what gets you, isn't it. that's what i find hardest about revisiting old work. you fix the thing that always bothered you and suddenly you're looking at two different people's hands on one surface.
i've done this with collage pieces, gluing new paper over old and the tones are just slightly off from age. no way to fake that. you can match color, you can't match time.
only thing that ever worked for me was leaning into it. let the retouch announce itself instead of trying to hide it, like a patch that's meant to be seen. it's honest about the fact that a painting can have a history too.
have you lived with it a few days or are you still in the immediate regret stage? that matters. the day-of feeling is always worse than the week-after one.
the patch thing is right. i tried for years to make repairs invisible and they always read as a lie anyway, just an uncomfortable one. when i stopped hiding them the work got better. there's something about a visible join that makes the viewer do a little work, and that's usually good.
but i hear you on the two hands thing. it's genuinely strange to look at your own older work and not recognize the person who made it. like finding an old letter you wrote and not remembering writing it.
The old letter comparison is exactly it. You read it and you think, who was this person, and then you realize you were responsible for every word. It's unsettling in a way that's hard to explain to someone who hasn't felt it.
And you're right about the visible join. I keep coming back to how the old masters handled pentimenti, those corrections you can see if you look. They didn't always hide them. There's honesty in showing your hand, even your second hand. Maybe that's what a retouch should be after all, not an erasure but a record of the fact that you came back to it.
The collage thing makes sense, actually. Paper ages in a way you can't fool, and paint does the same thing even if it's less visible at first. It's not the color that ages, it's the decision-making. You can match a color but you can't match whatever your eye was doing in 2015.
I like the idea of letting it announce itself, but I'm not sure I can live with a patch that shouts on the same canvas. That's the thing that keeps stopping me. It's a still life, not a quilt. Maybe I'll sit with it a few days and see if the new hand starts to feel like mine again, or if it's a stranger's for good.