top of page


An analogy I often use in class to differentiate between point of view (POV) and bias is to imagine that there is a crime with two witnesses. One witness sees the crime, the other is around the corner and hears the crime. In history when we consider multiple points of view we have to be careful not to simplify it as a "bias." Bias can be misleading because we often discount a voice in the story if we think it is biased. Point of view is deeper. In the analogy, each witness has a perspective that is not just their bias, it's their reality. They can't see other perspectives, not just because they are unwilling but, because they physically can't do it. It's not within their reality. It's also important to realize that each perspective has important information to offer, that both have pros and cons to their perspective, that both witnesses have personal narratives that may effect their interpretation of the crime. That both stories are needed to help us get closer to the truth.

What does this all have to do with painting?

I was happily painting along and then something interrupted my flow. I took a quick snapshot of the painting and then when I got home and looked at it again, it was immediately clear what was wrong with the painting. It was so obvious, I couldn't believe I didn't see it earlier. I was completely caught up in the reality of that moment. It happens to me a lot when painting. That's why I keep taking pictures of my painting and stepping away. Each time it happens, the clarity of what I didn't see before is exciting. It just doesn't happen like that in other aspects of my life. I think that's what makes painting so exciting for me. I love how it gives me that rush or "a-ha" moment. For a moment it feels like I'm arriving closer to the truth.

Related Posts

See All

Related Posts

bottom of page