Do you have a style?
Do you need one?
Do you just paint, draw,sculpt, weave, make prints, etc. of whatever you want?
One day abstract, one day photorealism, one day conceptual, one day photography, one day sculpture?
I have been told this is "NO GOOD!".
Did anyone tell Gerhard Richter "NO"?
Or should you only vary your styles when you invent them like Picasso? 
or when you are so famous you can do anything you want and folks are buying your name as well as your art?
I work in series, and have told other artists to try that, too; they say they like it.
I think I am a cyclical painter. I work on something for a couple or more years and that leads me to something else, and then I may wander back to an earlier train-of-thought with the idea to expand it.
I can also work on various different concepts using various materials at the same time!
Kinda like this blog. I revisit ideas but hope I layer the discourse and push it forward. Same with my art. I see the connective thread even when producing, on the surface, different results.
Just think about some well-known artists styles?
Georgia O'Keeffe's work looks one way. Bearden's look one way. Catlett's look one way, Leonardo's look one way. Mondrian, Giacometti, Van Gogh, Pollock, Chuck Close, Henry O. Tanner, Edward Hopper, Kiki Smith (who really does a lot of different things) and on and on....we recognize the line, the form, the color, etc. that seemingly identifies each of these artists.
Not only do I wonder if it's true that artists have one style or need to, I wonder if some artists freeze in time and want everyone else to? Do they run out of ideas and get into repeating themselves? Or do they just never get bored with the style they have developed?
At some point do some artists stop evolving?
All the art on this post was produced by me.
