Siddartha Beth Pierce
Siddartha is a Mother, Poet, Artist and Art Historian. Her work has appeared both nationally and internationally. Her first book of poetry was released by Writing Knights Press in August of 2012 entitled ‘In the Beginning and the End’. She was featured on PBS in 2001 as the Artist-in-Residence at Virginia State University.
I dedicate all of my work and inspiration to my son, Pierce Emery Haver, whom I adore.
This is a collection of poems that delves into Nature, Science, Art, Literature and the Spiritual.
Siddartha is not a pseuodonym for the author but her birth name after her maternal grandmother. Her great-grandfather studied theology and named his eldest daughter after the Buddha and hence Siddartha Beth Pierce received her name from her grandmother.
It is the author’s hope that all may find some positive aspect in her writings and work that may affect them and that they may then take this on to others.
Ms. Pierce is a nationally and internationally published poet and artist as well as a Mother. Some of her works have appeared in The Indian Diary, After-Nyne, Issuu, The Artist in You, The Dead Mule School of Southern Literature, The Muses Review, Budzu’s Hammer, and Blue Fifth Review. Much of her work can be found at writerscafe.org. -
Coffee Table Edition
8 by 10
includes Art Gallery
Black & White Edition
6 by 9
includes Art Gallery
The exhibits I remember most, quite awhile ago now, are the Degas and O’Keefe works at the Phillips Collection in Washington, D.C. One Degas in particular, was a bather, but it was like nothing I had ever seen – all other bathers pale in comparison. The depth of surface, quality of the pastels on such a flat medium were astounding and the colors brilliant. O’Keefe’s show with Stieglitz was also extraordinary – mostly for the undulating line and again such vibrant colors. Picasso’s show at the National Gallery was astounding primarily for his incomprehensible talent – such natural ability in so many ways at such a young age. Then, perhaps, my favorite of all was the Egon Schiele. His life, unfortunately cut short, but the expression and content of his works will never leave me.
I wonder why, throughout these last 100 years, each generation has often
defined their art as succinctly? Duchamp
– against aesthetic, for the idea.
Surrealists – against conscious and rational, for the irrational. Why is it always an either/or? It seems to me there isn’t one without the
other. If you require no meaning then
your meaning becomes meaning. It is not
black and white, there are grays and beyond that there are millions of
colors. There is pretty and ugly and
both at the same time. I don’t want art
that is simply one or the other – why not both.
While these artists have always chosen a path, generally distinctive and
definite – they formally have used tension, balance, complements. This underscores the variety while they often
hone in on one aspect of meaning rather than continuing this exploration of
difference. Why look at only our
mathematical, scientific side or only our irrational, ‘Universal’ side – each
make us who we are, human, individual and yet alike at times as well. Complex and simple – perhaps more one than
the other at times but always combinations.
Siddartha Beth Pierce;
August 10, 1998
Enchantment - Amethystium.mp3