The fine art of knowing what to leave out

Mark Twain once wrote a friend, “I didn’t have time to write you a short letter, so I wrote a long one.” Knowing what to leave out, boiling a thing down to its essence-that is the challenge. How to say a thing as simply as possible? This approach is sort of the opposite to economists, who are accused of “obfuscating,” (the meaning of which is unclear to me. 🙂

Yesterday I posted “Surprised by Dogs Long Dead” about a painting I have been working on for the next Magic Barn. What I want  to express in the painting is that the piglets were appealing, smart, very naughty and good luck to you trying to make them behave. I think they were like humans in these ways; at least like natural, un-programmed humans (aka kids.)

Good luck to you trying to make them behave.

The painting I posted yesterday was a failure, of course. I had been working on this subject for over 40 hours and they were all failures. I was taking the folk art, literal, chronicle-type approach: “Let’s see we had ten piglets, two dogs, five hens…” Just like an economist, minus the jargon. Didn’t work. What must I pare this down to before the message is clear?

You be the judge! There is yesterday’s folk art, today’s 1. “Morning Glories and the Piglets are out”  2. a vignette of a few sly piglets, or how about just the 3.two ringleaders?