All things have consciousness, this has been my mantra ever since.
And if this has to be true, it is also true that we only not paint consciousness, but the paintings have one as well.
It is a thought to think about.
These thoughts would be enough to end this blog post, to leave enough space for possibilities in mind to happen, but it has been my tactics to write a sentence in a concentrated form and continue from where one would need three other sentences in between to fully understand, unless the understanding comes as naturally as "reading" the painting.
Everything seems to be interrelational.
It would be so much easier to think about things as they appear: see, this painting is beautiful and this person is beautiful or this animal... But does that really sound to be true?
We can have picture perfect visual, but it doesn't have any deeper meaning nor effect.
Such can be the same also for the non-pretty thing, of course...
But I'm trying to make believe, that paintings that are not of MOST BEAUTIFUL SUNSET can have the X factor of truth that gives out a different pleasure. One that has a longer lasting effect, even eternal.
In comparison, would you prefer a plastic Barbi (hello, injections!) or some wrinkles that show life experience? Same with paintings, actually.............
Today I wanted to point out my personal belief, that is: the value of an artwork could also lie in truth that comes from powerful emotion and/or feeling and/or emotionless, meditation-like being, but which's core is to reach some other core, in that case: consciousness touching consciousness, all that being rather without any form at all....
As Monet said, I'd rather paint the air around flowers, but as I am not able to, I paint the flowers.
I am still trying to paint the air (among other things).
I'm still trying to capture the feeling that what ever consciousness gives out.
From my own humble perspective. 
Photos by Janne Jüsmä