A little aside.
In starting this “blog” I’ve been learning by looking and searching through other sites.
Finding myself traversing various artists sites of their recent artwork.
Links upon links with site names regrettably as bad as mine.
All are young artists it seems.
Under-grads in most cases I suspect.
Students at various NYC art schools.
Seemingly serious.
Most, apparently passionate about what they do.
Just having a professional looking site as an undergrad is impressive to me.
Wait.
They teach that now right? Part of the BFA curriculum?
But...
Dear god has every one of them taken the same pill or something? Studied with the same person?
Where does this penchant for random interior decorative style of “sculpture” or "site pieces" come from? Didn't that die around the 90's?
I missed something again didn't I?
Is it a combo of Judy Pfaff (pure decorator) or
Jessica Stockholder (much better but I keep thinking why doesn’t she just make paintings and cut the crap of proscenium stage,one view point object-hood) or is it the trendy embrace of this immature style by the “New Museum” that's led to this regrettable parody of change?
So very provocative.
So very challenging.
Artwork that has no meaning beyond the "navel contemplating" boroughs of Manhattan as envisioned by so many magazines and "reality shows".
"Put this here it looks right”. "Place this in reference to it to give it visual weight", meaning.
A "visual sentence".
To make non-objective sculpture with random yet recognizable objects is usually easy and free of any serious challenges.
There are no criteria of success or failure.
Anything works and nothing can truly fail.
Where is the mastery-the challenge-the defeat of a failed expression?
Instead of "do something"."Do something to it"... it's "arrange something". "Arrange something with it"...
And the drawings...
Does everyone think they can continue to scribble into their young adulthood?
Is this feigned innocence or pure in-ability? Is an unsteady hand evidence of sincerity?
Like Klee?
Dubuffet?
No I’m afraid their way to challenging to emulate.
No, more like a combo of Haring and Basquiat run through a "Cuisine-art".A desperate attempt to bring back the NYC of the late 70's and early 80's as imagined by the present downtown art students.
Wherever they are. The "mark-making" these sites feature is about as sincere, as felt as a paint your own ceramics shop in a Jersey strip mall.
Bust of Elvis anyone? Wait a minute...what could I put next to it?
It’s as if the style-yes, it's a major one- is to make whatever your drawing look as if it were done with a worn down crayon on extremely lumpy paper.
Jumpy.
Nervy.
Felt.
The angst of late Guston or the look of impending doom of Wiemar Germany.
However-
Here and now - The angst acquired.The marks accordingly from somewhere else.
Some other else.
Maybe next time painting
2 comments:
Yes. Where is the personal risk, the vulnerability, and how about emotion/passion/humanity any of the words you feel like choosing to explain what I thought was supposed to be the foundation of everything you make? I know I’m deeply rooted in this “navel gazing” category, and I’m willing to admit that gives me blinders on the topic, but I just can’t see where the artist is in the kind of work you’re describing. It’s like everything is kept at an ironic arms length, and that’s…a good thing?
That being said, I would love a Bust of Elvis if anyone has one (but as a fan not an artist).
Julia- No I think it's a horrible thing. Your so right about "an ironic arms length" being pervasive.
Post a Comment