art days...first year mfa show.

a.k.a. the [m]other[f]ucking[a]rtist show.

the current exhibition in the mason gross galleries is comprised of the first year mfa students. it's interesting to think about this show because it is a spot i could be in in a year or two. i was eager to see the concepts in perspective of those who are on the next step of a similar journey...

before even entering the show there were a small series of pieces in the corridor by bfa student jian chen. i really liked these pieces because he found solutions to problems i had in my work in a different manner than i would have. when my work reduced to a minimal state of a few pieces of canvas on a frame, the frame became a distraction. jian rendered the frame in the composition of a traditional painting around a traditional subject. it was a simple solution to a problem i was having but in a different kind of work.

upon entering the gallery, i was abruptly greeted by two new suspended walls in the main space of the gallery. i hate them. i don't understand why they exist in the spots they do. i was always a huge fan of that main open room for its lack of clutter. now its cluttered in my opinion. i was upset.

overall i did not like the show too much. i expected much more from a graduate student show in an institution like mason gross. i found a lot of the work to be simply aesthetic and not thought provoking. however this has always been a flaw of shows in the mason gross galleries. it seems as if they want anybody to be able to walk off the street and just have something "nice" to look at without the question of its conception or its dialogue with art. i didn't find myself having any valid conversations with the work that was in front of me. i didn't like the curation of the show either. the show seemed to be a cluttered collection of over-saturated, straight out of the tube colors that was hard to digest. i don't understand why the artists weren't allowed to curate it themselves...i assume they all know each other...its their work in their school's gallery. let them work it out. a lot of the pieces hung on adjacent walls didn't create any interesting relationships. i found it illogical that some of the smallest pieces of the show existed on the biggest walls in the gallery space while big pieces didn't have room to breath in the smaller rooms. i suppose they did there best but the show as a whole just didn't make too much sense...not to mention the fact that the show is open for viewing and seemingly incomplete.

there were some bright spots in the show however. i like the large abstract pieces in the back of the main room [artist not yet identified]. i liked the use of the gesture to evoke emotion. there was a lot of color but it was not muddy. you could see a lot of the artist's though processes. the works were on raw canvas which is something i am experimenting with in my own work. i feel bad that kristin melkin's work was hanging on that suspended wall. i wish it seemed more permanent in the gallery space. she created interesting sculptures out of old barn wood. even more interesting were the shadows they casted on the wall. i liked the overlay large work in the james hyde project space. it made me wonder how the hell they were done. i have no idea how to go about making a digital print that big. it also created a conversation with my work through the linear elements and the contrasting textures. i also enjoyed the progressive digital photography that was in the main room immediately to the right when you enter. i found myself wondering about the technicality of the photography and the intended message. i like megan flaherty's protography. i'm not trying to kiss ass because she's my t.a., but i definitely wanted to see her work since we've had an on-going dialogue about art through out thesis. the lanscape compositions were well considered and i could see the relation from one photo to the next. i liked the sizing of the photos because they scaled down the landscape and made it intimate. i do wish some areas were a little sharper though...however i think this was a conscious decision and the way the prints culminated in a video was nice. i felt it was properly installed in the space.

aside from these works i was indifferent about or didn't like the rest of the work in the show. i couldn't really stand to look at the installation in the back room. if i was one of the other artists in that room i would have been pissed to have my work in there. it became a totally incorrect forum to view the surrounding art. not to meantion that the installation itself was just annoying. the painted, sculptural, paper mache and chicken wire things weren't very good either. they looked like severd body parts that had been tie-dyed. i didn't understand why some were suspended, some were wall mounted and some were on canvas. i saw no unifying factor or relationship between them. the works on canvas were much more interesting than the rest of them. in fact i wish there was just the canvas works. they became hidden in the midst of the clutter. luckily for megan her work was on the opposite side of the other work in her room. i didn't know how to read that work at all...it was all over the place and was a mess of crayola lookin tempra colors and pop logos. i also didn't care for the series of small glossy paintings in the first back room on the right. they reminded me of the work by raoul de keyser i saw in chelsea earlier this month. his work did nothing for me and neither did these.

all i hope is that our thesis shows run smoother and turn out better than this...

on to the next one.

graduate school.

nearing the end of my undergraduate journey, i'm still unsure as to whether or not i want to attend grad school. it would be cool to have a masters, but since i don't totally know what job i want to have, i don't know if it's necessary. as an artist, the conversation always comes up whether or not to go straight to grad school or take a couple years off [not to mention the "what are you going to do with your degree?" conversation]. there's a lot of factors that play into the choice...

for me personally, the issue is what to study at graduate school. i like so many things...there's so much i want to do. it's kind of a beautiful problem i guess. i suppose i'm fortunate to like anything that much. for a while i thought about going to grad school for architecture...then it was automotive design...now i'm thinking about getting into fashion related matters...and i can always continue with visual arts. decisions, decisions...

top 5 schools [unranked]...
columbia university.
rhode island school of design.
pratt institute.
school of visual arts.
parsons school of design.

honorable mentions...
savannah college of art and design.
yale university.
fashion institute of technology.
california institute of the arts.
maryland institute college of art.

you can probably tell i want to be around the city. we'll see what happens from here on out...

art days...the met.

typically when i think of going to the met it is followed by some audible type disappointment like, "ughhh" or "...damn." it just tends to be pretty inconvenient and overwhelming. this past friday i had to meet meet my english architecture class there. whatever. then i was excitied to find out that the robert frank show was up. i was excited to see it. at that point i liked what i knew of his work and wanted to see more. then i also realized i've never really written about photography except for the blurb i wrote about jurgen teller a few posts back. i'm a painter and [to me] it's way easier to be critical of painting techniques. i think there's a set of much more extensive decisions that go into a painting than a photo. i've been heavily into photo recently so i decided i would enjoy looking at some photo work that's held in high esteem.

looking in: robert frank's the americans.





arguably frank's most famous work from the series, trolley-new orleans. 1955. shot a few weeks before rosa parks refused to get up.

released at the height of the cold war, the americans is a series of 83 photographs of raw american life in a consumer economy. all of the images are black&white gelatin silver prints and the lighting [natural i assume] is suberb. often depicted subjects are miners, street cleaners, pedestrians, diners, buses, etc. some of the images are slightly out of focuz but they still succeed as photographs. there is a beautiful depth of field and there often visible grain which could be the result of the size. however the photos are still sharp and i like the aesthetic. his working often depicts people being people, or what i like to call lifestyle photography. frank terms it, "the humanity of the moment." he also uses this to describe his interaction with some of the candid subjects that approached him after a photo was snapped.

a lot of these photos have a cinematic styling that connects the images and gives them a common factor. it makes me wonder if some of these photos are staged or if frank was really in these spots at these times.

it was interesting to see a lot of the elements to this show...there a photos depicting some places in farmiliar with like hoboken, the east river and canal street. i also enjoyed seeing some of robert frank's contact sheets. you can gather some of his thought processes. it also reminds us that he was definitely not working in the ubiquitous digital age. it's such a different mind set knowing that a photo can't be erased with the click of a button. once you pull the trigger on a film shot that's it...no going back to the moment.

through the show theres quotes on the wall above the photos, often by jack kerouac who was the writer for the americans. concerning frank's photos, he says, "any body doesn't like these pictures don't like poetry, see? anybody don't like potry go home see television shots of big hatted cowboys being tolerated by kind horses." i think that commentary still rings true today.

some of the photos i liked...

us 285, new mexico. 1955.

charleston, south carolina. 1955.

rodeo-detroit. 1955.
movie premiere-hollywood. 1955.

"i am always looking outside, trying to look inside, trying to say something that is true. but maybe nothing is really true. except what's out there. and what's out there is constantly changing."
i felt this quote bt robert frank was a proper ending to the show...it will end this post as well.

i've been thinking...

...is there any art that cannot be reproduced?

in my painting 2 class sophomore year i made a frame for a canvas that had extra wide edges so i could create a painting that existed totally on the edges of the canvas. richard baker, my instructor, jokingly said, "this is 'irreproducable' art." is that ever true? in the met on friday i saw some of the period rooms with my english architecture class...some of which were the real rooms, others were recreated. i would have figured these types of work were free form reproduction but this was obviously not the case. so it got me thinking about reproduction and its [maybe nonexistant] limitations...

on the horizon.

the madbury club.

nineteen year old entrepreneur and brand owner phillip t. annand is at it again. his clothing brand, the award tour, is already well off the ground and likely on its way to mainstream success. with the steady and faithful following of the award tour, the madbury club promises to also be successful. this online type of publication is phil's answer to the overly mainstream blog format which has become redundant and lacking uniqueness. friday i was headed to the metropolitan museum of art when i randomly happened to bump in to phil on 72nd street and got involved in the project he was working on that day. central park was the stage but i'm not going to reveal too much about ensuing events, for my explanation would do no justice. i'll let the following black&white photographic goodness give you an idea of the madness that occured that day...
























































i'm excited to be even the least bit involved with this project. its good to see people my age, and even younger than me, working so hard and doing their part "to save our generation from blowing it." inspirational. open your minds and be receptive to new ideas. to quote phil himself, "consider yourself well read."

up up and away my brethren.

"seven days in the art world"...chapter 3.

the fair.

art basel...one of the biggest art fairs on the world with some of the most serious buyers and artists alike. it's interesting to read about serious art dealing because there is definitely a certain level of etiquette involved. last year at the large picasso show at the gagosian, i saw an elderly man get out of his brand new, $400K rolls-royce and proceed into the show. when i walked into the show i saw this man with an art dealer literally walking around trying to casually buy picasso's, mid-afternoon on a friday. "is that one for sale? what about that one? i kind of like that one..." i don't know if he walked away with anything, but he was definitely serious. it didn't seem like the proper forum for buying art of that echelon...so it was nice to read about it in the way it should be done.

"the fair is significant from a prestige point of view. if a gallery is not admitted, people might think that it is not as important as another gallery that is." before reading this chapter i only knew of art basel and not how serious it is. this quote definitely put the scale of the event into perspective for me.

in the wake of chapter 6, i found it interesting to read the small dialogue with poe&blum about murakami. having actually thought about what it would be like to work for him, i got a reality check when poe said people quit due to how hard he worked. when the topic of murakami showing at the gagosian and the surprised reaction of poe, i wondered if they were speaking of the show that just came down. this is a portion of the highly acclaimed work, 727 727, from the fair in the book...

"distracted by a pair of beautiful women, landesman pauses for a moment of aesthetic appreciation." i found that to be an entertaining way to say landesman checked them out...it was "artsy" if you will. it's good to know that one of artforum's international publishers is still human regardless of his role in today's art society.

"the art world has no rules...so i attribute the longevity of the gallery to the fact that i wrote my own." this quote applies to the entire realm of the art world, not just galleries. make your own rules...don't let anybody dictate any sort of right and wrong for you and your work. this quote might be cliche but it's valid...i think cliches are often cliches because they're always true.

"i am an atheist, but i believe in art. i go to galleries like my mother went to church. it helps me understand the way i live." this statement was somewhat surprising to me because sofia ricci inevitable invests her life and beliefs in what someone else does for themselves. but then i thought about it and realized that her beliefs are comparable to organized religion. religion is also based on what someone from the past did, believed and wrote down. we only know about these things through writings and what other people said. so how can we be sure they are even true? maybe sofia is smart in investing so much of herself in something she can see and interpret for herself with no clear cut message of beliefs to follow.

"an artist entering an art fair is like a teenager barging into his parents' bedroom while they-re having sex." ohhhhhh johhhhhn [baldessari]. i have a feeling this quote of going to be selected by a lot of people in the class. its just funny. i had no idea going to an art fair as an artist would be so awkward. i wonder why that is...is it almost like being a celebrity in public? you know what you've made...is it nerve-racking to see people's reaction to your work on this scale? if that's the case...is it nerve-racking for an actor to go to their premier?

"we don't buy anything without looking at it in the flesh. what's great about a work often doesn't show up in a jpeg..." this was funny for me to hear from a legitimate art buyer/collector because i would assume it to be for the opposite reasoning. i would think that a basic photo image would hide the imperfections of the piece...not obstruct its potential greatness. obviously art is going to be more amazing in person because a jpeg hides elements like brush strokes in paintings and other small details you can't gather without being "in the flesh." i'm often astonished by the actual size of works which you can't understand until you are in front of them. but i always imagined the "greatness" of a work would shine through in most any context.

art days...the zimmerli.

blocks of color.
american woodcuts from the 1890s to the present.



with classes in full swing i didn't have time to get out to the city this past friday like i usually do. i was excited to find out that there was a contemporary woodcut show up at the zimmerli. i took relief printmaking last semester and ended up enjoying this process. i also felt that it would be a nice change of pace from all the painting shows i have been seeing but there is often a dialogue that can occur between painting and woodcuts.

the exhibition is comprised of over 100 prints from the 1900s. the early woodcuts [from the early 1900s] included the work of "masters" like bertha lum, b.j.o. nordfeldt, gustave baumann and edna boies hopkins. from the gate i was really surprised with the high technical quality of the work. the colors were rich and dense, the registration was tight and the edges were super clean. the subjects were scenes of regular life...people working, animals, landscapes, etc. the works were modest, quaint and pretty small in size. woodcut was a traditionally japanese technique and it was easy to see this influence in some of the early work through the subjects and people depicted. i wasn't too interested in the subject matter of these earlier works...

...i was much more interested in the subjects of the work from the mid 1900s. these works we abstract and some of them paralleled abstract-expressionist painting. it was interesting to view the work in chronology because there was a definite transition into the full-blown abstract and even minimal works. artists like ansei uchima aided this transition with a series of abstracted landscapes. there was also a work by richard diebenkorn, who dipicts landscapes to the point they are unrecognizable and often organic shaped of color. it was interesting to read that there were something like 33 colors printed on 18 block [don't quote me on that]. it does not appear to
be that deep. here's a portion of it...







this shifted into a series of works by sherrie levine. her prints were also a very interesting process...with the arise of the rudimentary computer, levine was able to scan prints of famous paintings and pixelate them into 12 areas of bold color. she then inked 12 square blocks with those colors and bound them to for a grid that was 3x4 units. i really appreciated the innovation of this almost futuristic technique. these works transitioned into prints by famous minimalist artist, donald judd. he printed a series of 4 bold, pure cadmium red vertical and horizontal bars with the paper showing through each bar.

helen frankenthaler also had 2 nice prints in the show. they seemed to be an abstracted landscape and nude figure. i like the areas she chooses to depict, they are minimal and subtle but still convey enough inf0rmation. they exist well on the paper. i also like that the landscape was printed on colored paper. here's a portion of it...




i also liked the work of jim dine. he had two large prints that were ambitious because of this size. i liked the quality of his prints in the he incorporated the natural grain of the wood and i like his use of negatively hatched lines to create shading. his compositions were interesting in that they went well beyond the borders of the paper and created interesting negative spaces.

in summation i liked the work itself. there was an extensive amount of prints and a nice variance in techniques and styles. i wished that some of the works weren't behind glass though. i understand the need to protect the work but i found myself being distracted by my reflection sometimes. the work was a little too cluttered in the space and there was some periphery interference. there was minimal use of carve lines or integration of the wood grain. there is a definite element of beauty in the nature of the process and i wish it was embraced more often.

it's good to know that a valid and useful art resource lies in my backyard...

a bold statement.

the following video is about a realm of outer space that the human eye can come nowhere even remotely close to seeing. in september of 2003, the hubble telescope sat in space and looked at an unrecognizable portion of the universe for over 11 days. it was able to record images that were 78 billion light years away. i don't even underdstand how they can measure that far...unfathomable. in this session in outer space, the hubble telescope recorded "the single most important image taken by humanity." that's the bold statement i was referring to in the title of this post.

this is the image recorded but the hubble telescope but the video is pretty interesting and still worth watching...
















everything in this image that we would imagine to be a star is actually another galaxy.

it got me thinking...what makes an image important? of all the images ever taken by humanity, how can it be determined that this is the most important? can there be a single most important image of all time? i also enjoy the cross-over of science and other non-art-related material and subjects into art...

fat shouts to my homegirl michelle for putting me on this video and emphatically demanding i watch it.

some photos i took.

i've recently talked about my lack of painting over the summer months. some of the reason for this was my new interest in photography. i was never ever a photo kid until this spring when i knoced the dust off my dad's old canon ae-1 from the 80's. one of my best boys, martin, is pursuing a music career and my camera acquisition became a way to help him out with some shots.

if you want to see some of my photos check out my flickr.

if you're really feeling too unmotivated to click the link to my flickr page here are some of my favorite shots...
film [scanned and edited]...


















































digital...



















































also...check out some of my friend martin's musical genius here.

"seven days in the art world"...chapter 6.

the studio visit.

i like the angle that was taken in this chapter...it was not what i expected. after reading the crit, which was from the view of a student, i expected the same thing from the studio visit. i thought it was going to be the kind of studio visits that i go through in which an instructor come to evaluate your current works and progress. instead we visited the studio space of a working, and successful, artist, takashi murakami.










takashi is a valid artist for us to investigate. he has had a direct influence on our culture from fashion collaborations with marc jacobs at louis vuitton to music artwork for kanye west to fine art of his own.
























points of interest...
i really like the idea and purpose of kaikai kiki co., ltd., run by murakami. "it makes art. it designs merchandise. it acts as a manager, agent, and producer for seven other japanese artists." it is a fully self-sustainable artist collective in which little to no outsourcing or external services would be required. to me that's a very raw and beautiful concept this day in age.

"i like to think that i have a more honest relationship with our artists than some other dealers, but i don't want to be anyone's shrink." this quote calls a few things to mind for me. first i think about the stereotype that artists have delicate, little minds and are ofter crazy, for lack of a better term. why is this? just because we think in a different manner and view the world differently than most people? when thinking about a shrinks job [basically to figure someone out] i related it to the actual work and how people feel the need to 'figure it out.' how come the first thing non-artists ask is 'what does this mean?' why does it have to mean something? take it for what it is sometimes. why don't more artist reply 'nothing' if they don't have an answer? it's something i've come across when thinking about my own work. i'm gunna' start saying 'nothing.'

"a studio isn't just a place where artists make art but a platform for negotiation and a stage for performance." i think there's a lot more that can go in this sentence...compromise, self-discovery, success, failure...the list can obviously go on. the studio is important. its a safe haven and an escape, as cliche as that may be. instead of having an office with a desk i have a studio with an easel. its also interesting to think about long hours spent in the studio as a performance...

"takashi"s practice makes warhol look like a lemonade stand or a school play." that's quite a bold statement based on how revolutionary warhol's method were. i wonder what basis this statement was made on because there are many possibilities...the quality of the work, the amount of the work, the aesthetic, the process, the overall operation. i wonder how murakami would react to this statement after he was earlier quoted as saying, "i like everything [about warhol]...i am jealous of warhol." so on one account he is out-shining an idol. i don't think that was ever an objective of his, he probably wouldn't feel as if he has surpassed warhol at all.

"i'm a big fan of marcel duchamp and his ready-mades...changing the context of an object is, in and of itself, art." i don't want to say i was surprised by jacobs' reaction or knowledge of this subject because he is definitely an artist in his own right, but i didn't expect his eloquence, humbleness and thoughtful insight. i happen to feel the same way about that infamous fountain. just because someone can do it doesn't mean they did. i think it's totally creative and innovative. duchamp was definitely an interesting mind...jeff poe definitely wouldn't want to be his shrink.

i've been thinking...

...does a painting have to involve the use of paint?

art days...chelsea chillin.

i went out to chelsea the other day with my usual companion, alan. it was nice out...we got to bring the cameras out finally...we were ready to go.

juergen teller: paradis.

lehmann maupin gallery. 540 w26th st.

upon entrance i was a fan of the space. it was a simple room but big enough so the work had room to breathe. first thing i noticed was the size and quality of the prints. they were large...4-5 ft high or so. they were real grainy and i thought, "did the size compromise the quality of the print?" but then realized it was intentional. the pieces i like the most were of nude models in the world renowned art establishment, the louvre. i want to know how he got permission to do this. can regular people take photos in the louvre? what's interesting was the placement of nude figures, specifically women, in this museum. he put a classical subject of a classical art form in a place of classical art. i see it as almost a response to the guerrilla girls except here the nude women are actually in the louvre [just as grand as the met]. the rest of the pieces were his artistic shots of works in the museum. not as interesting to me.

enoc perez.

mitchell-innes & nash gallery. 534 w26th st.

i was interested in the work of enoc perez right from the gate because he depicts a lot of architectural form. i've often used architecture in my work so it was interesting to see his depiction of it. the works are clean with a lot of saturated colors. the texture of the surface is the most interesting. alan and i spent a good bit of time trying to figure out the method.

the edges are clean enough that they could be prints but then we realized they were taped. then i realized the surface looks like the result of not having enough medium in your ink when you roll it out with a breyer to do a print. from our judgement, they were rolled. the work exists on a good scale which is large but still allows you to digest the whole piece. he does not simply try to paint architecture as he sees it and injects his own specific style and angle.

ed cohen.

winston wachter fine art, inc. 530 w25th st.

alan and i became sort of uninterested in the artists on the suggested list so we started to go into gallerys that we thought would interest us. i'm glad we did. the work of ed cohen brought me back to my roots. his work is comprised of drips and bright color. its a new take on the first paintings i ever did when jackson pollock made me change the way i look at painting. cohen effectively puts his own spin on pollock in a more minimal sense. he takes something thats familiar to people and put it in a new context. this is something i've realized about my own work so i think thats why i liked it subconsciously. the work also made me wonder about how it was made. the drips exist on a solid white or black surface. but they do not sit on top of the surface like you'd expect, they are a part of it. he definitely works wet into wet but the paint hold such crisp edges that it's surprising and it's a little puzzling. they are super glossy as well. i think there was the heavy use of some kind of resin.

honorable mentions...

thordis adalsteinsdottir.

stux gallery. 530 w25th st.

flat, bold, almost androgynous figures. they often take strange forms and positions. there is a meticulous use of pattern. they almost appear to be prints. refreshing.

maya lin.

pace wildenstein gallery. 545 w22nd st.

so precise. so calculated. so perfect. so meticulous. so amazing.

it really makes me scratch my head and wonder how it was done.

not-so-honorable mention...

barthelemy toguo: the pregnant mountain.

robert miller gallery. 524 w26th st.

way too much work to digest at once. there were photos, paintings, sculptures, an installation, a video and even a performance piece one night. not what i expect in chelsea.

reassurance.

the other day i sat down to draw a photo for a friend for the first time in a long time. i was happy with the result. you can't see all the detail but its good to know i can still draw like this...

successessssss!

artistic spotlight...danielle ramirez.

danielle ramirez is also in her fourth year at mason gross and is a painter. going into the interview i had had some basic classes with danielle so i was a little familiar with her style...super clean. imaginative. playful. illustrative. i was interested to see some of her paintings and to see if her work had taken any new directions.

one thing i noticed immediately was her use of bold color in her paintings. she said she used to work with predominantly bright colors with minimal blending.














her work has since shifted to a some what cooler palette of blues in black with bright highlight spots. danielle attributes this to darker subjects in darker atmospheres. she works in oil and says her drawing history has created a lot of her painting style. she went on to tell me she's had some trouble with the bridge between drawing and painting because her sketches [which she turns into paintings] are very complete and exist how she wants them to look. she's sometimes runs into some difficulty getting her painting to match the vision in her head. more often than not she paints on canvas but recently she's been painting a lot on wood and sheet rock.

i was able to notice a clear difference in her painting and what she painted as an academic prompt. her work is very dream-like and imaginative. when i asked about he inspiration she said it was mainly raw human emotion. she attempts to illustrate emotion and make feeling a visual endeavor. to describe the process she says she takes a feeling and tries to think about how it looks. she's able to create a pretty clear visual which she then turns into a sketch and ultimately a painting. she says, "i think i have such trouble moving on the painting sometimes because i take so many steps...it's being removed so many times from the image in my head and the first image is the truest image." eloquent. she tries to resist the temptation to think about what the image feels like instead of just lo oking at the image because things can become to obvious and stray from the original vision.

danielle feels a connection to the work of artist amy cutler. she comments that they have a similar way of doing things and her illustrative style successfully conveys what she feels. danielle like cutler's style and concept and feels that they have something in common. when i asked about her use of music in the studio she responded saying that she uses it to block things out a lot. this helps her let her imagination work at its best and aid in visualizing a feeling.

danielle said that her childhood played big role in her life as an artist now. she always kept sketch books and they were often filled with drawings of mice [yes...mice] and characters she would create. she enjoyed drawing comics and i can definitely see how that's influenced her style today. at one point she lost contact with her art and her abilities. she developed a liking for fashion and had the urge to design. an open house at f.i.t. quickly made her realize that art school what the proper place for her. with some convincing of her parents she is now breathing, eating, sleeping and working as a mason gross student.

when i brought up the topic of these she seemed kind of intimidated by it at first but that started to disappear as the discussion went on. she wants to combine some of the things she's learned on her time in school, mainly silk screening. she feels screen printing works well with her heavy drawing style of painting. as mentioned, she sometimes has a problem turning her drawings into paintings and feels that this transition might be easier with the use of silk screen and elements of painting. danielle even spoke about her recent ability to knit and crochet and might even find a way to incorporate that into her thesis work. her subject matter for thesis will go back to "what [she] sees when [she] feels." she said this will likely involve the use of the figure. as far as sizing, she said she wants them to be pretty modest, in the 2' to 3' range, so she can use a lot of detail but remain intimate. post-graduation she wants to take a year off at least before she considers grad. school and hopes to move to philly. her job now has its biggest location in philly and she's hoping to be able to transfer there and continue her work as an artist, finding new people and inspirations along the way.

"seven days in the art world"...chapter 2.

the crit.

honestly this was the first i've read of this book. let me start off by saying i would never sit through a crit that long. i enjoyed the first person account of being a person observing the work. the only thing i wish is that the narrator got involved in the discussion. from the gate i like the 'legitimacy' given to asher by discussing his works at the venice biennale. the commentary on crits is very accurate in that there are often awkward moments of silence where everyone seems unmotivated to be there. other times conversation is constant whether it be natural or sparked by a solitary comment. there's the people that never talk. there's the people that think they know everything. there's the people that leave. there's the people that speak whatever come to their mind. there's the people say say little but when they do its valid. crits can be awkward efforts for artists to defend themselves and other times crits can be moments of praise where the artist can remain humble or become arrogant.

this chapter extended far beyond the borders of the classroom though. it went much deeper than i expected. the commentary on the necessity of an mfa degree was nothing that i've encountered before. the discussion of what to do with that degree is a struggle that we all face and hope to endure through successfully. i was immediate shocked by the chris burden imitator. i had wondered why that photo was at the start of the chapter and thats not what i had expected. i also like that the text was applicable to the los angeles area and i found the insight to hollywood crossover interesting. i wish there was something that wide-spread in the new york area.

i also enjoy the validity of the various faculty's/artist's take on crits. there were three main 'types' of crits presented in this reading. the crit where the instructor interjects as needed. the crit where the instructor says nothing. the crit where the artist says nothing. i feel all three are appropriate in different situations. i tend to like to not say too much...or wait till the end. i thought the end was a great twist when the narrator waits till everyone leaves to re-evaluate the classroom. the thought that the student remains exist as a piece of artwork after a "post-studio" session is interesting. it's definitely a conceptual piece that could have been conceived by asher. i've seen the studio considered a piece of art but never a crit room. its art in the wake of art discussion.

some of my favorite quotes...

"creative is definitely a dirty word...it's almost as embarassing as beautiful or sublime or masterpiece."

"you go in and out of consciousness. when so many people open up your work, they say things that you never imagined, and you start to feel baffled."

"to be a great artist in the long term, you need to trust your own intuitions and instincts, whereas academia is based on rational group-think. there is a magic and alchemy to art, but academics are always suspicious of the guy who stirs the big black pot."

i dislike blog posts with no photos.

art days...the moma and such.

a couple weeks back i head out to the moma with hanneline and my advanced painting class. every time i go its amazing to me how many people come from far and wide to this overly large, elaborate establishment filled to the brim with with modern art and some of the best shows in the world. maybe i take it for granted because its an hour train ride and a 20 block walk away from my residence in new brunswick. i met up with alan and we strolled over 53rd st between 5th and 6th ave to the moma. amazing to find was the entrance line which almost extended to 6th avenue before the doors even opened at 10.30 in the morning. the reason for this journey was the james ensor exhibition that was on display. prior to this i had no real knowledge of james ensor and his work. as soon as i got to the 6th floor and entered the show i could tell there was A LOT of work. so much that i used capital letters. my class dispersed so we could view at our own pace. i proceeded to put my headphones on and nod my head around this extensive show that so many had come to see.

ensor is a belgian artist and this show displays a lot of his work from the 1880's - 90's.  he developed a "tachist" style which uses a sketchy, suggestive style of paint application. upon first peruse, i immediately notice that there are many deep layers of washes that all convey different information and detail. areas of color are often comprised of many reflective colors. the tonalities can be very similar but we can still discern all of the necessary information about the image. on the contrary, there is an effective absence of detail in spots in which our mind can successfully create what is missing.

the paintings alone were very diverse. some were bold and full of detail with heavy paint application while others were thin and made of multiple layers of thin washes.  the areas that appear under-developed in these paintings become just as important as those that are fully developed. i noticed some of the work almost starts to remind me of lucian freud paintings through the use of color and even texture in some spots. ensor also has religious pieces they are not cliche or idolized. sometimes he even represents himself as christ.

amazing to see were his drawings which were nothing short of amazing. my understanding is that ensor drawings are hard to come by and there were a good number of them at the moma. some of these drawings were monumental and on a level i've never contemplated tackling with that much detail. from my judgement they were approximately 8 feet tall by 5 feet wall. astonishing. what's great is there there were other drawings that were 8 inches tall and just as captivating as the overly large ones. it was a beautiful contrast.

there were also a good amount of ensor's etchings in the show. the etching sometimes contrast his drawing style but the style of mark making is often similar. some of these etchings are brightened with the use of colored gouache. there is a lot of fine line work and detail in his prints.

his self-portraits play a big part in the show.  he represented himself in many different roles including Christ, women and skeletons. they were typically done in an effort of self-promotion and social engagement. there were also a lot of works that included people in fantasy settings with masks and spirits.  these works came at the end of the show where his pieces became more playful and satirical. overall the show was amazing, diverse and extensive. this brief review does it no justice...you could easily write pages. i'm sorry for those who missed it.

after this we headed on down to chelsea.

these will be brief responses...no more essays...

paul kasmin gallery. 293 10th ave. NAKED!

wide range of completely nude figures. all media. from classical stylings to immatre, playful, cartoon like images.

kent gallery. 541 w25th st.

eclectic group show. from figures to landscapes. graced by the likes of yves tanguy and giacometti.

cheim & read gallery. 547 w25th st. the female gaze.

completely feminine. women dealing with women's issues. some cliche. some mystical. some photorealistic.

zach feur gallery. 530 w24th st. dasha shishkin.

subjects and content not directly related. hard to tell the work is by the same artist. connected through pallette and playfulness. from figures to flowers.

luhring augustine gallery. 531 w24th st. janine antoni.

at first you tend to scratch your head. then it all comes together. innovative. impressive.

d'amelio terras gallery. 525 w22nd st. joanne greenbaum & elliot green.

j.g - the strokeyness of giacometti meets architectural and geometric form. bright. loud. large.

e.g - extreme figural abstraction. bright. smooth. artist's hand is visible.

sikkema jenkins & co. 530 w22ndst. mark bradford & kara walker.

m.b - beautiful surfaces made of non-traditional materials. lots of layers. often sanded.

k.w - typical cut paper and paint. mainly b&w. some color. use of negative images. even a video.

pace-wildenstein gallery. 545 w22nd st. maya lin.

amazing.

david zwirner gallery. 533 w19th st. raoul de keyser & chris ofili.

r.d.k - small color field paintings. a lot of solitary strokes. some collage. not for me.

c.o - pencil drawings of repetitive forms starting at the same point. a lot of movement. simple. almost psychadelic.

with the imminent threat of rain i didn't want to bring my camera out so i could not document the day. worst part is that is never even rained a little bit. damn. that was a long post.

hit it big.

"hit it big" is the show currently up in the mason gross galleries comprised of works from faculty and second year graduate students.

i really enjoyed this show. i definitely found it interesting to see work of my teachers displayed in a gallery setting. as students, we know of our teacher's work but often do not see it. our relationship with them doesn't extend too far past the classroom. the work was an eclectic mix of stylings and mediums but they all blended well together. works that were paired in the same room often had similar qualities. the work was also distributed well within the space of the mason gross galleries.  this is definitely something to take into account when thinking about setting up a thesis show with our peers. for many of us, it is the first time thinking in this manner so the insight from those above us who have done this in the past is more than valid.

start it up again.

i haven't painted in a while...

since last school year to be honest.

at the end of last semester i didn't feel like my ideas were that fresh anymore. they weren't exciting. i was interested in my concepts but not so much the execution. so i took the summer off in hopes my ideas would manifest themselves into something new. now that school is in full swing i don't have the luxury of the relaxation. however...i have new ideas now. i'm ready to go. time to start making stretcher bars. time to start ripping yards of canvas and creating the little thoughts that stream through my head in hopes of something grand...time to start it up again.

back to your regularly scheduled web browsing...

alex bag..."untitled fall '95"

i had no idea what to expect from this video so i kept and open mind about it and proceeded to watch it.  i knew it wasn't a good thing when i found myself checking how much time had passed within ten minutes...

i wasn't amused by the video at all.  yea, it accurately portrayed feelings that the majority of us have felt on this journey but it didn't do anything with them...they were simply put on display.  we should all be aware of them at this point.  the voice of the characters were so monotonous and pessimistic it literally put me to sleep.  it was comparable to  sitting through a lecture about a subject that you're not interested in by a professor who should have called it quits years ago.  i suppose how i can see why some would like the video...it just wasn't for me.

the part i enjoyed the most was when bag returned as she was starting her eighth and final semester at SVA.  i found that commentary to be the most interesting and thought provoking amongst a sea of dull fish.  the subtle acquisition of 'art kid' stereotypes [cigarette smoking and coffee drinking] were witty and a nice touch.  other than that the best part was the series of power naps i got.  maybe i should watch it again.

art days...the new museum...HELL, NO.

i was excited to go to the new museum.  i had never been.  i was eager to see new work that i had no knowledge of.  sadly, i was pretty let down.  upon approach, i liked the unbalanced aesthetic design of the building despite that fact that it unsuccessfully made me feel like it as going to topple.  hopefully that wasn't the intention...

i was even somewhat amused by the off-centered "HELL, YES" regardless of the fact that it was rainbow and i disliked the type-face.  i do like that it minimally appears as the only text on the facade of the building...

however i felt the work inside didn't evoke as much as excitement as this text conveys.  at this time, i think it should read "HELL, NO" as the title of this post insinuates. i wish i saw this if it still exists...

inside i saw the work of 3 artists.  the first of which was black panther artist emory douglas.  the vast majority of his works were offset lithography prints. they were bold, graphic and showed the in justices again african-american people of that time...like we've seen so many times before.  that's my issue with this work. it wasn't new.  it wasn't different.  it's been done.  i immediately got the message and only continued onward in hopes i would see something different with no avail.  one of my companions on the day, alan, was totally correct in saying that the mural wasn't even exciting by the time we got to it. unfortunate. the blurb printed on the wall said, "they are pictures, and they are meant to change the world." i don't see how that's possible with how redundant this subject is.  one of the few things i found interesting was the portrait of malcolm-x.  it was the only hand drawn piece of the show.  what's interesting to me is that it portrays a highly idealized subject in a technique that appears to be much more labor intensive than the prints. i felt this was intentional within the works that were selected for this show.

second was the work of david goldblatt.  his photographs depict different areas of south africa starting after the apartheid.  the oldest works were black and white prints that depicted a lot of indigenous people.  they were shown going about their daily lives in a manner that makes them seem kind of content despite their circumstances.  this was a nice contrast to the strong views of emory douglas.  there were a great deal of old and new photographs juxtaposed to show the evolution of a specific area or other relationships.  this was sometimes successful but more often than not it was hard to see the relationships.  overall this work is still something that we've seen before and became excessive.  the presentation and the sheer size of the prints was nice.  so was the mimic jail cell installed in the wall as you climbed back stairway from the third level to the fourth.

finally i saw the work of dorothy ianonne.  it's her first show in the US and her work illustrates the gender paradigm.  she often uses herself and her lover as her subjects and a loose first-person narrative.  all of her paintings showed scenes of sexual encounters and were big, colorful and stylized.  the work places emphasis on the act and contains some kind of controversial phrase. this work was fairly refreshing after the monotony of the previous two artists.  if i had to pick a favorite of the day it would be this. maybe that's why i have the least amount of commentary about it.

overall...not worth the price of the discount student admission.

unfortunately it was raining the day i traveled with the good brothers alan and matt so i was not able to bring my camera to document the excursion myself. so for now i'll leave you with this clever art humor that most of you have probably seen before...