In the world of contemporary art, Peter Tigler is an artist who balances a "blue-collar" work ethic with a high-concept visual philosophy. His career trajectory reads like a map of creative curiosity, stretching from the high-pressure television sets of Beverly Hills 90210 to massive public murals and intricate furniture design. Today, from his studio at the end of Route 66 in Santa Monica, Tigler has turned his focus toward The Animal Collection: a series of intimate, small-scale portraits that strip away the distractions of habitat to confront the raw "power" of the subject. In this conversation, we discuss the organic evolution of his career, the technical logic of "figure and ground," and why, in a world of digital noise, he chooses to capture the quiet, non-judgmental existence of the animal kingdom.
COCO HOLTZ: You’ve had an incredibly diverse career—from the sets of Beverly Hills 90210 to murals and furniture design. Looking back, what was the common thread that allowed you to navigate such vastly different industries?
PETER TIGLER: Opportunity. A fairly well known artist gave me great advice: “Grab the opportunities and cultivate those that like you or your work.”
CH:Before you headed West, you spent time at the Art Students League of New York, worked with WWII refugee artist Jane Grishaver, and completed a BFA in painting at the Rhode Island School of Design. How did those early East Coast influences shape your perspective on art and being an artist?
PT: They validated and valued a visual skill set.
CH: You eventually traded New York for Santa Monica, famously noting that the "end of Route 66" was a good place to start. How has the Southern California environment changed the way you approach your work compared to your roots?
PT: You never fight the weather or temperature here. Anything goes in LA. Anything works.
On the Animal Collection
CH: You’ve shifted your focus heavily toward figurative elements lately, specifically animals. What makes them such a compelling subject for your "paint space" right now?
PT: Animals don’t judge their environment, they just exist in it. It’s a wide variety of life that can live in my paint space.
CH: Your portraits—from the Octopus to the Pigeon—range from the exotic to the everyday. Is there a specific "energy" you look for when choosing a subject?
PT: I start with the found background. It suggests what should be in it. I’d say [it's about] the presence it will have on that ground, the pose, the surface texture.
CH: You also elevate "livestock" like pigs and goats to the level of fine art portraiture. What is the significance of giving these common animals that kind of platform?
PT: Humans forget they are animals.
CH: There is a striking sense of personality in these pieces. How do you go about capturing the "soul" or temperament of a non-human subject?
PT: I’m glad that comes across. I suppose it’s pose, composition, color, accent etc. Many of these portraits feature the animal looking directly at the viewer. It gives them power.
The Technical Craft
CH: Technically, you often favor masonite or wood over traditional canvas. Does that smooth surface change how you render complex textures like fur or scales?
PT: Doesn’t change a thing. I prefer relatively smooth surfaces.
CH: And what about the composition itself? How do you decide how the animal sits within the frame?
PT: These paintings are classic figure/ground relationships. I find the background already made so it is just the figure that has to be added. This simplifies the process to a great extent.
CH: You’ve decided to keep these animal paintings at a deliberately small scale. Is that a choice driven by the residential spaces they end up in, or is it a creative constraint you set for the series?
PT: The animal paintings are deliberately small scale. That was decided at the get go. No need to revisit that.
CH: When it comes to the business side—printing and museum-quality reproductions—do you design with the "print" in mind, or is that a separate process entirely?
PT: Always downstream. There are no real technical constraints; the scanning process and digital printing is terrific. I tweak a few minor things on the scan now and then, but really it’s very little.
The Artist’s Perspective
CH: Does your study of these animals end when the painting is finished, or has this series changed how you look at the natural world?
PT: There is so much I don’t know. I am constantly looking things up.
CH: What do you wish critics or collectors asked you about more often?
PT: Questions regarding very esoteric ideas on the concepts of abstraction, representation and notions of materiality. Only painters think about these things.
Quick-Fire Round
Most challenging texture to paint? Every texture presents the same problem. That is to find the structure and then creatively interpret that in paint. I want it to look like it but not imitate it.
Oil or Acrylic? I like oil over acrylic but I use both.
The animal you haven't painted yet but want to? Too many.
Large scale or small scale? Small.
0 comments