Good afternoon /ic/, never-lurking first time poster here. This is probably going to be a more lengthy OP than you guys are used to, but I can't think of a better board to go to.
I get that most threads in here are painting/drawing related, but I'm wondering whether anons can entertain the idea of discussing subjects ranging from conceptual discourse and relational aesthetics to performance, installation and appropriation of found object/raw materials, personal items, etc.
I'm a BFA (Hons.) Alumni of City & Guilds of London Art School, graduated from the Painting Department in 2008. Half of my graduation show contained sculpture/installation.
I'm a multidiciplinary artist, having produced a number of exhibitions, both solo and curating for group shows, been published twice (poetry) and been running a studio in two different locations for the past 14 years. Predominantly I work in painting and installation, but I see the studio situation as a performative vantage point for relational work, and have adopted Bruce Nauman's approach to art making.
I am also a devotee of The Metamodernist Manifesto
(cont.)
Pic related, it's one of my sculptures.
The studio I've had for the past five years has been part of a project, operating on the boundary between reality and fiction, where I've been posing as a gallery-runner who's continuously working on getting his venue up and running (my studio is 200 square meters with a store-front, on a high street,) gaining some renownment among other gallery workers and the director of the local art museum, and seen as an asset by many in the local art community. In addition, I've been advertising commissions, given secret tutorials at the local art academy, was a board member for a open studio fair, and the past year I've been tutoring amateur painters in my studio.
The time has come for me to move out of my current studio, and I see this as a logical point to finalise the project, moving the content from a commercial website and presenting it as a work of art on my portfolio website. To summarize, I've created a whole situation surrounding my artistic practice, occupying space rather than showing much "real" work. Now I want to transform what most people have believed to be a failed artist-run gallery space and studio, and reveal it as a demonstration of a real-world institutional critique piece, centered around the building that houses my studio, with strong notions of personal doubt and avoidance when forced to confront the bastardized art world of post-modernism. I want the audience to adopt the work as an attempt to cast light on the problem our culture is facing when artists who found themselves interested in art for the sake of producing magnificent paintings, end up making incomprehensible gender-issue bullshit, void of aesthetic beauty, due to their formal marxist education.
Any thoughts?
Pic Related, it's my studio during an exhibition of sculptural photography by a local artist.
Been painting for 10hrs, too tired to think.
But I love you
Great work, but even though /ic/ is for art, the board is mostly populated by people who do representational art.
>>2424349
>Bruce Nauman's approach to art making.
>Metamodernist
What is this approach and where can I find some info? Also any tips on keeping up with contemporary arts and finding info?
Most of this board is reading old as shit ArtHistory info rather then following contemporary jazz.
>>2424375
from Wikipedia:
Confronted with "What to do?" in his studio soon after graduating, Nauman had the simple but profound realization that “If I was an artist and I was in the studio, then whatever I was doing in the studio must be art. At this point art became more of an activity and less of a product.”[2] Nauman set up a studio in a former grocery shop in the Mission district of San Francisco and then in a sublet from his university tutor in Mill Valley. These two locations provided the setting for a series of performed actions which he captured in real time, on a fixed camera, over the 10-minute duration of a 16mm film reel.[3] Between 1966 and 1970 he made several videos, in which he used his body to explore the potentials of art and the role of the artist, and to investigate psychological states and behavioural codes. Much of his work is characterized by an interest in language, often manifesting itself in a playful, mischievous manner. For example, the neon Run From Fear – Fun From Rear, or the photograph Bound To Fail, which literalizes the title phrase and shows the artist's arms tied behind his back. There are however, very serious concerns at the heart of Nauman's practice. He seems to be fascinated by the nature of communication and language's inherent problems, as well as the role of the artist as supposed communicator and manipulator of visual symbols.
You can read the manifesto at http://www.metamodernism.org
>>2424368
OP here, I'm on my iPad, so don't have access to many of my paintings, but here's one with at least one representational element.
>>2424414
Fuck you for making my artboner nice and hard, who needs sleep. So this metamoderism Jazz seems similar (only with regards to polarities) to the Vorticist movement. Except it's major poles appear to be Modernist idealism and Postmodern irony. Or any poles really, but it has that nice fluid back and forth between them. I dig it. This is going to be in my head all day.
But this MM jazz does solve one problem for me, what is the point of creating works when if I try and infuse them with meanings it comes off idealistic but when I try and work PM style they come off sterile. It's a back and forth created by simontaneous exposure to criticism from both sides. At least MM gives me a back and forth rather then a crippling inability to stand behind a work. Art is painting for me, canvases are just left over to document the action.
As far as that guys making practice it seems based on procedure and chance (from a cursory look). Something I can appreciate as a probalistic programmer (ml-church) and collage artist. I use random chance and restricted encounter as a method to subvert my own subconscious biases. For me a trashbin is a wonderful anthropological device.
As far as your gallery studio, that's just fucking genius. Did you come up with this at inception, or was this just "lolIwasjustpretendingtoberetarded.png" in a building?
Jesus fucking Christ, this thread.
>>2424434
MM isn't really a movement, but rather a way of incorporating both modernist and postmodern problems in your work. Personally, I don't believe modernism is a finished communal project, but it was hijacked by artists and writers at a time where those restricted by their contemporary mediums ran out of new ideas,and the new kids in the block demanded that we rid ourselves of old ideas. This notion of getting rid of the old in favour of the new is such a adolescent concept, I never really identified with this convoluted preconception of rules of art making, because it doesn't reflect how society runs, and looks more like the fashion industry than anything else. One of the main reasons I don't believe we're done with modernism and the art history than preceeded it, is that I think there's a strong link between the development of art movements and the exploration of our human ability to evolve into higher stages of perception. If we just take the shock of the new as general consensus and run with it, we might leave behind very real problems with humanity behind, and as a result of doing so, we've accepted this postmodern nightmare of memetic viruses, proclaiming money and celebrity as our highest values, accompanied by irony, narcissism, paranoia and cynicism.
We need an escape, and as apposed to the people living in modern times, we need to look backwards into history in order to navigate with the humanity we so dearly need during this machine-like age we're living in. I salute any craftsman wanting to excell in the arts of our glorious rennessanse masters, but in order to influence the art world of today, we need to understand our contemporaries and speak their language as well. In order to survive the postmodern, one must become incomprehensible to the machines and produce the change we want to see in the world, utilizing both new and old.
>>2424434
> I use random chance and restricted encounter as a method to subvert my own subconscious biases. For me a trashbin is a wonderful anthropological device.
Perfectly stated. I do the same, restricting myself to very few tools and methods (like creating change through heat) or materials (like limited palette, or working in one medium only when sculpting).
My entire studio is one great trash bin, leaving discarded items lying around - as soon as I get organized, I lose a lot of my initial drive. The chaotic should always be considered.
In my work transformation, creation, the transcendental and the incomplete has always served as important notions. I'm into eastern philosophy and occult mysticism, and I believe that the images we produced have very real consequences. I am also less concerned with creating boundaries between what's considered representational and abstract/non figurative. If I create an abstract painting, it will be a recording, as you say, of very real, physical movements and influences upon actual matter. This is no less representational, but it is a phenomenological approach, which includes the whole perceptive organism, rather than what's limited to vision as a mental phenomena - it represents the very real things that has happened to the canvas. The hand is invisible, and it doesn't represent anything other than what it is in and of itself, but representational nonetheless; even as you can isolate certain areas of a figurative painting and only see abstract forms and colour.
Pic is mine, and yes it's suppose to be that way.
>>2424417
very nice
>>2424557
Thanks, I been thinking about this the last couple of days. Did it at art school back in 2007, but can see myself creating more in the same style.
>>2424375
Forgot to answer about reading up.
Most literature on art is heavily influenced by philosophy and art theory, but you could read critics' reviews in newspapers - they will review shows of modern painters put up at major galleries as well, not only contemporary. You could go through galleries' stable of artists and see if you can find statements on their respective websites. Also read exhibition texts, often written by curators.
Personally I don't think it's necessary to always read about art to influence good work. At the moment I read about chaos magic, and I've already discovered new aspects of my work, that was always there, but hidden from me consciously.
>>2424434
I'm seeing a student now, so will answer about my studio later.
How did you afford your big studio? How much does it cost?
>>2424760
I'm in massive amounts of dept. I've talked my way out of getting kicked out several times, and might get sued at some point.
I'm considering including letters and legal documents in the presentation of the finalized work.
It's cheaper than it would've been, had it been in proper order, but for the entirety of the time I've been there, it hasn't had any hot water, and the basement has been flooded on five occasions, destroying at least 30 of my paintings. In addition to this, I'm the janitor of the building, and I've named the place "Janitor <my mother's maiden name>", so I'm known in the art community as The Janitor, in my native language.
I've been homeless for the past three years, so I live in the studio as well. Only once has the toilet frozen solid, but it does get cold as fuck during winter, and it's intolerable as all hell during summer, because the storefront windows are facing east and there's no ventilation.
It's all part of the work, though. How low can I go/how much can I stand, etc.
This thread is a jewel.
>>2424434
Felt I didn't reply enough to this, so I'll elaborate.
>it's major poles appear to be Modernist idealism and Postmodern irony. Or any poles really, but it has that nice fluid back and forth between them. I dig it. This is going to be in my head all day.
You're right, the concern in it's center is to rise above the duality and draw from both views how ever you choose - but beyond that, the important aspect to this, is to embrace the duality within oneself, to accept that one can't ever be fully sure, and that doubt and one's fallacies in fact makes us more true and complete. As is states in the manifesto, the inadequacy of a system is part of the system's make-up.
>MM gives me a back and forth rather then a crippling inability to stand behind a work
Exactly, because you're allowing the work to be and do more than one thing at a time. Painting is surface and illusion on space at the same time. It is object and picture, simultaneously. It is placed outside of time, and yet takes time to both create and view, and it is these dualities which makes it impossible to kill - postmodernist pathetically tried to pro lame it as dead, and look how wrong they were. Painting is very much alive in the art world today, and we've been doing them since the Stone Age. Alongside fire, there's not much else that only humans do, that has existed for that many millennia.
So, if you look at it from a greater distance, it's not that important whether you sometimes experience your own work as sterile or idealistic (or pathetic or pretentious), because we're not in a hurry, and you got you're entire life to figure things out. We're allowed to fail sometimes, and we're allowed to embrace more than one philosophy, principle, method, etc., as long as we learn from our experiences and continue to contemplate more than one point of view, it's all good. This is the core of any discourse; to juxtapose any two ideas.
>>2425699
Correction:
>illusion of* space
>proclaim* it as dead
what a load of bull
>>2425722
please...
>>2424350
That's a pretty interesting project, and I really value that you are explaining it clearly rather than in very vague statements, whilst still leaving space for interpretation.
Please present it in a similar way when you round it all up. Of you have been interacting with members of the community, writing a really vague artist statement is unfair and also lazy. Please continue to keep your art open to be understood by all that it touches.
>>2425738
Cheers, I think clarity and sincerity will be at the apex of any novel movement worth supporting. To shroud everything in nonsensical mystery just for the sake of it, with no feeling at it's core, is just decadent; nice to look at, but lacking real purpose to get moved by.
>>2424350
i rolled my eyes no less than three times reading that garbage
if you have to say that much about your art, it's weak.
>>2425764
>assuming that writing in length in an Asian cartoon image board implies that I feel I have to write anything at all
Actually, the only writing I got on my official portfolio website, besides titles, is stated year of birth, education and which city I work in.
Also, roll your eyes all you want, I do the same quite a lot when reading, but you're lacking the insight needed to claim to be able to tell whether any body of work is weak, if you base it solely on the fact that the artist happen to enjoy writing. It's relevance is what's important. The work I've posted ITT is made in the span of nine years. My work might be weak, I'm not here to convince you otherwise, but imho it depends on what criteria you judge it by.
Pic is a couple of years old, please tell me how shit I am, and I'll most likely agree since I'm such a lazy fucker.
>>2424349
n-needs more l-loomis k-k-kek
>>2425789
in all seriousness, I have no interest in non representational but I'm interested in other people's interest in it if that makes sense. otherwise I have no thoughts... just a thumbs up!
samefag all over this thread
I don't like this at all. Sounds pseudointellectual and pretentious as fuck.
Whatever floats your boat, op.
>>2425817
Any suggestions?
This is a critique board, how about telling me what about it is pseudo intellectual? My project isn't that hard to grasp, but I guess I've left important information out, because it relates to the city I live in, and how there's a lot of vacancy in the city center. My country's government has since it came to power started to make things harder for people working in the arts, and wants to commercialise art, so my work will incorporate political comment, but at it's conception my work is first and foremost poetic.
I've had the venue for almost five years, and only had openings six times. It's not exactly screaming for attention, so please explain to me what about me wanting to finalise a project about real estate and how that relates to people and artists working in the city, with personal and poetically formed notions, is perceived as pretentious? It's not like I'm writing an 11 hours long opera about the descent of testicles and it's symbolic value to freemasonry.
If I were a degenerate modern art artist, then I guess I would explain my work as little as possible, leave the interpretation vague, and let the critics do the talking.
>>2425873
Of course you would. That's what art students are instructed to do, and the way I see it, part of the problem - and probably why you call "modern art artists" degenerate. The art world is huge, mate. There's loads of painters today that are represented by huge galleries who don't sit on 4chan, but that you guys would relate to nonetheless. You have to sort through loads of whack shit before you get to it, and most do write utter bullshit that's conveyed in a way that might fool some into thinking it's great, selling the emperor new clothes, but eventually you get to something you truly value. To read about it could potentially ruin it for you, and then you might gaze upon something you don't really get, yet reading about it can help you appreciate it. It's not that black and white, senpai.
Personally I feel that writing in length about my work on /ic/ will only increase the chances of getting to talk to someone who can actually relate, but I welcome any criticism as long as it's grounded in something other than taste.
Taste has nothing to do with whether something is good. We're looking for formalistic and discursive critique here.
I don't like this shit but do your thing boy
>>2424349
It doesn't belong here because there's mot much to discuss. you either like it or don't, and anything someone sees in the pieces is completely subjective.
There's no way to give back critique because of the complete freedom the artist has to do as he/she wishes. threads like these would be a shitstorm.
As well as there's no great skill involved in most pieces rather just expression presented through the tools and medium, so all posts will be do you like it? ;) etc.
Maybe the threads could work just on their own in the Art category of this board, but then again unless you're talking about the top tier artists it would be rather dull and pretentious, and not to mention it's best to see said pieces in person for photographs take away far too much from the experience.
I see /ic/ as a tool for the artist to get good, get better, be inspired and share in the art world, this can be a part of it if the people who dislike it keep to their corners, but that won't be the case.
Give it a shot if you want, OP.
>>2426025
That's a very peculiar way to approach art, since taste (do you like it or not) is informed by individual lives lived in different ways. The movies I've watches, the clothes I've worn, the vistas I've grown up with are all different from what any other person has experiences.
The way I criticize art is on it's own merits. I wouldn't judge a conceptual work of art for breaching the limits of formal three-dimensionality any more than I would a charcoal drawing for its lack of colour, or a book for demanding my attention for more than four minutes. The interesting questions to ask are:
>how well does it achieve what it sets out to do
>and in what way is it interesting to talk about
Art is part of this world, not separate from it.
>I use random chance and restricted encounter as a method to subvert my own subconscious biases. For me a trashbin is a wonderful anthropological device.
>I've been homeless for the past three years, so I live in the studio as well.
>I'm in massive amounts of debt. I've talked my way out of getting kicked out several times, and might get sued at some point.
Soon you'll be not only homeless but rightly in prison. Hope all that pedantry you were imparted with in your art college was worth it weirdo.
>>2424434
>getting riled up over yet another inconsequential art bowel "movement"
Kill urself
>>2426153
Two different people here bro. I'm the Vort dink. First response in two days, been working on breaking cubism away from discrete views by adding motion, attempting to retain some semblance of form. It's slow going, but we're getting there.
>This notion of getting rid of the old in favour of the new is such a adolescent concept
Yet there is always a drive to remove what is and replace it. the problem I see with tearing down history is then we just go re-walk down paths we've already run down believing they're new. Look at Trump in the states, there are tons of connections to how he holds himself and his arguments that lead to Hitler coming into power. Not many see it but here we are, I'm honestly looking forward to a fascist USA, going to make for a nice big war.
>My entire studio is one great trash bin
A bin that you've slowly curated with action. I'm going to be piecing together some collages later built to map an area using random chance. I built a paper fortune teller from a map of Paris, to use it I look at the leaves and pick the first word that comes to mind from it (say ferèze > Hack) and flip it that many times, I repeat this on the inner map and pick a the first pocket with something to stand out. Under the leaves are various colours. I'm going to use this tool to select collage elements of colour from a delineated area (say downtown, or Riversdale) and set them out and cut out 1x1in squares using a form (while blindfolded). Composition I will leave to myself however and the final piece will have some visual coherency. But I'm trying to pull my conscious thoughts and directions out of this work (which still shows through in a reduced capacity, the areas chosen, the compositions and rotations). I want to let the piece speak for itself, but my hand is still to be in there. Not just as Artist as Instruction-executor.
>critics' reviews in newspapers
This is a great one. One benefit of my town is that I'm involved with various gallery runne
>>2426291
rs and curators who I meet regularly and boucle ideas off. Sitting in the basement devoid of the human contact is kind of separating honestly. My works have some ties to the local visual artists and their works are starting to reflect aspects of mine. It's nice.
>chaos magic, and I've already discovered new aspects
Modifying your own perceptions has a way of doing this. That's why I find looking at shit in a bog standard design sense sterile. I'm a catholic and in some of my works the symbology is striking, but that might just be the pareidolia talking.
>destroying at least 30 of my painting
Jesus. Elevate those things!
> concern in it's center is to rise above the duality
That's exactly what the Vorticists were about, putting themselves at the point of maximum creative energies. They set up dualistic structures are argued back and forth between them using simplistic arguments to create conflict. Not fighting for either side, but for both/and. This structure allowed violent energetic discourse between the two for them to work with. PM/M, White/Black, Male/Female, Muslim/White, Purple/Yellow, etc. The conflict could be viewed as a Vortex with the Artist constantly navigating their way into the center, the point of maximal energy! There is no purpose to a one-sided art, a Vortex of discourse/conflict cannot exist between it and thus it lacks any energy and becomes dead. The Vorticist allows himself to be on both sides, a mercenary (who is progressing) and transcends the actual argument but enters into a type of transcendence of it. From the centre there is protection and vitriol.
>>2425785
>official portfolio website
Hit me with this, interested AF.
>ou have to sort through loads of whack shit
The hardest part of ic is learning to separate the crap from what is useful to you.
>you either like it or don't
Bud, use some more words. You've seen how many colours can be mixed from Ivory and Titanium right?
Anyway, keep going op. This is fun shit.
>>2424434
Shut up max
>>2426306
Getting late, but thanks for turning me on I'll read up on Vorticism!
Will write more tomorrow.
>>2426291
damn nigga i completely forgot about cootie catchers
>>2426542
No worries, nobody really knows about their jazz. Didn't help that their Artists aligned with fascism and a few died in the trenches. Ezra was writing for Mussolini FFS. Lewis got a schtick as a war painter, so that's cool. Watching everyone die saited the appetite for violence, but seeing cycles happen. Might be time for a resurgence, Muslims and whatnot. Most of the works are lost, but there are two copies of BLAST available online these have most of the works. A simple search will reveal what's left of the paintings. There's not much though, Brittiah AG movement cut down by the war. Fitting end actually.
Forgot to bring up polarization earlier, very integral to the movement. Fuck half measures you're either with us, or against us. (But when you fight for both, shit gets hairy)
http://library.brown.edu/pdfs/1143209523824858.pdf
http://library.brown.edu/pdfs/1144603354174257.pdf
>>2426550
Except this one uses a sheer volume of info augmented by subconscious properties to operate!
bull fucking shit
>>2424440
i was also starting to despair at the cock sucking the OP was getting.
the pretentious twat. fuck off
>>2424349
Am I the only one who hates artists like OP? I rolled my eyes trying to read through this thread and take you seriously. You're a joke. I see no actual talents in anything.
>>2428458
if only false sophistry could serve as replacement for OP's lack of artistic skills. it doestn. the fact that he would rather speak of his art to great lenght than letting his art speak for him says allot about him; a hollow, uninteresting prick
>>2428458
I've been laughing the whole time. I'm pretty sure the whole thread is satire. As usual with the philosophical art threads, you can't quite tell if the OP is a genius or a fool. It's beautiful. I called it a jewel as in a joke, a jest. I don't do this with my work. I sculpt and build things with my hands and grunt, but I still respect this kind of thing.
>>2428465
Sometimes the Melancholy Jaques is more interesting than Odysseus.
>>2428521
i seriously doubt this is satire or even trolling. we will see when faggot OP returns.
>>2428521
It's both, lighten up
Faggot, hollow OP here.
I slipped on the ice and broke my leg, so was out.
To those who dislike what I'm doing, could you please tell me if you would criticise any of the individual works I've posted, if I had made separate threads for each of them?
The thing you people don't get is context. As a painter I'm perfectly happy with bouncing inbetween different styles and directions. I'll always consider formalistic problems with each painting, no matter whether I'm working realistic, process-based or expressive, etc. If most people on /ic can't be bothered with anything other than realism, that's fine by me - I'm not the one being stuck - but I have posted representational works itt, so my question to you is do you turn a blind eye to it, just because I'm into other stuff as well? Imho that would be the same as refusing to listen to a classically trained pianist just because he also happen to produce drum'n'bass. It seems extremely narrow minded.
I've had my studio practice for long enough to be quite certain about my methods, so back to context; as I said, the situation in my studio is an important factor to my work. Art isn't separate from the world, and so I strongly believe that I would have produced very different works of art, had I been in a different studio than the ones I've had. My surroundings is what inspires me, and there's no reason to keep that from happening, so I let the studio itself become part of the context in which the work exists. As a parallel to this, the work chances if it's shown in a white cube or on the internet. When my paintings are hanging in my studio, the studio itself is part of the work.
What about this approach is worth your immediate hatred? I sculpt with my hands, I spend hours in front of my easel contemplating the same as you do - but I do other things as well, because I acknowledge that we are living in a continuum, and the twentieth century did actually happen. It's possible to return to the old, without ignoring the new.
>>2429868
And because nobody seem to process important points I've made, I'll repeat myself:
Believe me, I do not talk or show people/the audience a lot if what I've written, unless the text itself is suppose to be published as a work in and if itself (I have been published by the largest university in my country, btw). I write very simple, very phenomenological with a mix of the poetic, and half of the exhibitions I've had in the latest year, I haven't even had a press release about the content. I'm actually quite distressed about the amount of bs literature practitioners in the field feel they need to produce in order to present their work properly. But this thread is not an attempt to present my work in full, I'm just curious to see if someone out there might point out stuff that's good/interesting about it that I haven't thought about myself, and equally things that are stupid/awful/bad about it. I'm not the least bit interested in polarised opinions like
>genius
>foolish
In other words, we agree that the work needs to speak for itself. But anon is unlikely to visit my studio, and I'm on 4chan to get some opinion, not to present this project as a finished work. What I've written ITT, is not how you would experience actually seeing my art. To judge it by the amount of words I've written, and the nature of it being philosophical, instead by the content and subject matter, seems to me like you guys know very little about art. You might as well rename the board Kitch & Anatomy. And I'm not being sarcastic, I'm an admirer of Odd Nerdrum and John William Waterhouse, who most in the art world despise. Kitch is great, but discourse is also important, and not everything that includes paint and brushes should solely be judged by the merits of muh old masters.
>>2429868
and in that picture, there lies in the sum of your words. am i supposed to be impressed here? you have to understand i would have given you the benefit of the doubt if you were humble and presented yourself as a beginner looking for help. but you insisted on hyping yourself to the extent that you created a hype that shitty painting simply cannot live up to.
"To those who dislike what I'm doing, could you please tell me if you would criticize any of the individual works I've posted"
thats precisely the problem here. where is your work?
the first picture you posed, i dont even know what to make of it. did you consider aspects of proportion, design. aesthetic beauty? these are not things that just limited to representational artist. the Greeks you used in architecture and the product designers continue to use them.
second one. is quite stupid. where does your art begin and end? is everything within the light shed your art piece? maybe just the white piece of paper? or perhaps two pieces (the brown and white papers) or its the whole room, including the the plastic shelf, and the dirty floor?
same with your latest piece. you couldn't even simply rotate 90 degrees so we could see it properly. or is it supposed to be experience from a sideways angle? what the fuck. you would rather string up words, build up hype and waste time then being concerned with presenting your art so that there may be no confusion.
mate. i hope your trolling.
now of course you could point the atrocious grammatical errors and spelling from my end and thus take the high ground. but then what happens? that your art is your words/writing hence why put so much though to them and not these pieces that you neglected even in your simple process of presenting them to us.
I'm too lazy to read all of this right now so I'll come back to it tomorrow most likely.
OP, at a glance you look like a pretentious fool trying to get a rise out of these anons but there might be some merit to what you're doing. You wouldn't stick around this long and speak so deeply about your work for a laugh on a Sunday.
Regardless as other anons said this is a board that most artists look down upon the type of art you're creating as hipster bullshit so getting any critique here is going to be pretty much zilch unless you're drawing super realistic or kawaii anime girls.
>>2424349
Can you explain this sculpture? The concept and process (if it's even relevant)
>>2429908
Fair requests, senpai.
First picture is of a sculpture primarily made to test the materials and how they blended, and to see if it held its own weight. It's destroyed now anyway, so It doesn't really matter whether you got issues with propositions. It's a photo of a three-dimensional object. You can't walk around it, so you can't really judge it. I'm not fussed.
The second pic, like I said in the post, is an exhibition by another artist I held in the white cube I've built in my studio. Everything outside of the cube is not part of the exhibition.
The last picture my phone turned on its side, and I don't know why. I agree that it seems like I don't really care about presentation, I'm the first one to speak up about bad presentation in galleries and portfolios. But this is 4chan, and I don't really care. As I said in my OP, I've never lurked here, this is my first time posting. I don't need this, but I was curious too see if a thread about conceptual art had its place on this board. None of the pictures I've posted ITT are on my portfolio website. It's just stuff that I've done. I will usually take years before updating my site, because I might take that long before deciding whether something is finished or not. I've got paintings in my studio that I started working on twelve years ago, that still aren't done, even as I had an exhibition last year where I showed work I made in the span of 72 hours. And if you gave a shit about where I'm coming from, you're welcome to check out the manifesto I linked to.
And for the Greeks, in the contrary to painters in general I feel there's more to be said for Neolithic art than classicism. No joke.
I'm very much content with pulling 'painting' out of the expression, and destroying the 'fine' in art. But no matter what and how, I fully agree with you that presentation is crucial, I just didn't take this forum seriously enough from the get go, otherwise I would've only posted perfectly cropped & lit pics, not snapshots.
>>2429912
The sad part is that people with opinions like modern and postmodern art is hipster bullshit (I'm not protesting,) have little historical knowledge. Don't you think that the old masters where considered hipsters by their contemporaries? Paintings before the late 1400s was only produced for churches, and after that patrons in Italy who were filthy rich started supporting talented painters because they wanted to show off their wealth by other means that real estate and their amount of servants, elevating themselves by having their portraits made, which only royalty (and saints) had had previously. Art used to just be a craft, is service to the church and elite, but during the renaissance painters started to look into science and nature, and wanted to achieve realism because science started to replace religion's real = truth (already at this stage do we get discourse), and soon art started to explore other truths, so we get impressionists' and post-impressionists' view that reality the way we see it, with our phenomenological vision, is made up part by part, colours next to one another. After that other truths followed, and each got its own ism and value. The post-modern, as I said holds celebrity and monetary as its highest, and I believe sincerity, transparency and acceptance of circumstance are important values in what ever follows.
It's a good thing to hold the craft alive, but to merely sigh and roll eyes in our opinion of everything that followed the advent of photography as hipsterish, because we cherish classical painting, seems stupid, especially when people get opinionated. Everyone opposed to conceptual art are very welcome to ignore my attempt at finding the few who would like to discuss it.
>>2429944
Multi-leveled. Based on the poetic notion of animated minerals (through growth), inspired by stalagmites. The poetic element is key to a science fiction story I'm going to publish next year, with references to alchemy - the magnum opus, colour changes from yellow to red - represented by rust. In my story an occultist group of people adorn themselves in rust, much the same as people historically have done with gold. The story features a rogue planet, made up of glowing iron oxide, travelling through our solar system, erasing the memories of everyone who hasn't isolated their heads with helmets made if lead (this will also connect with sculptures I'm making,) thus giving rise to a symbolic cult.
We usually see rust in "perfect", industrially manufactured objects, that due to time and the elements start to look more and more like nature, of which it originated (turning brown, less perfect, more chaotic), witness to that our attempts at control and order are only temporary.
The objects I'm appropriating for the sculpture are various tools, that through the assembly will disconnect from their intended purposes, becoming irrational forms in replacement for the symbolic equivalent of the cross, grail and various other religious items. I figure the sculptures in this series as altars or idols of a fictional culture, risen from an irrational need for a system of belief in a world strangely void of meaning and built out of trash.
The other elements in the sculpture are heat, which I often work with (alchemy, again), represented by the base made out of an 1960s electric heater, and bin bags I've melted over fabric and painted gold for adornment purposes, sealing/finishing the object, as an art historical nod to saloon galleries, and simultaneously proposing recycling as the order of existence, giving it a skin in degradation. The fabrics are intended as a medical notion, sealing of wounds etc. The base is filled with both un-fired and fired clay.
>>2424417
reminds me of tunguska in 1908
>>2429993
>Don't you think that the old masters where considered hipsters by their contemporaries?
Nope. The concept of hipsters is a relatively new one and it can't really be connected to the past. It's not enough to say that they, the old masters, created new fields of works and therefore they were hipsters; the spirit is completely different. A work is said to be that of a hipster when the main merits to be observed, as well as its means to garner esteem, are its idiosyncrasy, self-reference, newness, and a certain kind flattery that it requires a special thought process to appreciate the work, so that those who appreciate the work are part of an intellectual liberal-minded (in the contemporary sense) elite. Whereas in the Renaissance for example, as written by Alberti, a work should be appreciated by both learned and unlearned. Hipster art frustrates the viewer.
(I haven't really read the rest of the thread. Just popped in.)
>>2430464
I get what hipster art is, and I know the type of artist, believe me - I meet a lot of them on a monthly basis at least. But you should also consider that the expression has become deluted in the past ten years, to mean anyone that kind of sticks out of the contemporary norm. Hipster used be to a very specific term, and originated in the 1940s, for the subculture associated with jazz and its specific clothing, attitude and lifestyle. Today it's anyone who dresses like the revenge of the nerds and is still considered cool. If you have to delute the expression, we might as well point out who the hipsters were in any age; Goths were the hipsters of the 80s.
I just think it's too simple to just call something hipster art, just because you don't immediately 'get it'. Where is it writ large that one should always 'get' a piece of art? Was Stanley Kubrick a hipster filmmaker because not everyone that watches 2001: A Space Odyssey for the first time understood it completely? Can't artists embrace that which requires a bit of thinking, contemplating before it's understood? What about the effect of immediate experience? Isn't that worth anything to people who primarily appreciate representational art?
And being unlearned - doesn't that apply to everyone who hasn't trained their eyes to look at still images for an extended period of time?
My goal is not to illustrate ideas, but rather work from them, which generate the type of materials and objects I use. Obviously, if you're completely void of creative thinking and don't get obvious associations arising from the inherent qualities of a material (if it's decomposing it's communicated something to do with death/entropy - if it's green and growing it's to do with life, simple) and the cultural association of the kind if item (stalagmites made of metal isn't far from looking like a crude, primitive antenna).
One doesn't have to be instructed in code deciphering to associate.
(Cont.)
>>2430464
>>2431191
(Cont.)
Of course, a lot of artists work with more specific items, like a plant having cultural/historical meaning, or molecular structures and how they can set discourse for some other structure (in society, in cosmology...) connecting otherwise very separate subjects. This requires more reading to fully get, and to be honest, I'm not really bothered if the art isn't also aesthetically pleasing.
Then again, as I said, I work with aesthetics, I look for balance, I consider the palette of an assembly of appropriated objects. And I do this as a painter. I consider the process of building an installation as drawing in 3D, and I often link the subject matter and content to my paintings. In reversal, I use my paintings as props in my installations as well. My exhibitions are merely collections of various objects connected to thematic subject matter. The immediate experience is how they behave in the room, if you will, what sort of mood they summon, how they make you move around in front of them, and the vantage point for what they make you think about.
These are suggestions, and only that. Each person viewing the work will have different readings if it, that's not something I as an artist wish to control, I merely create the opportunity and flavour it with the ideas and character I wish to communicate. And it so happens to be that I'm drawn to the alien, incomprehensible and curious, so whether you are learned or uninitiated, it won't matter - as long as you're there for a visual (and motor-sensory, phenomenological) experience, first and foremost, and an intellectual one secondary. The relational element occurs when more than one person is looking at the same thing, and the two of them start having a conversation, because not only are they discovering different things about the work, they are also learning about each other, and how each other think. In this sense, it doesn't matter what the work is, so much as what the work does.
>>2429868
>I slipped on the ice and broke my leg, so was out.
Christ, I hope you're joking. If not, Canada is a bitch.
>so my question to you is do you turn a blind eye to it, just because I'm into other stuff as well?
Honestly? Because most of this board is interested in concept art, basic illustration and webcomics. Fine art is something pretensious and to be avoided, read loomis lrn2draw, that's a well rendered pipe. To not get a response to your pieces is also a product of not knowing how to look at a trad work, sculpture or anything that can exist in a gallery context. This is 4chan, mostly filled with basement dwelling weebs. What I'm getting from this is your conceptual way of looking at artmaking, and I'm loving it. Not used to seeing the art process in this scope. Honestly use a trip and shitpost, might improve the quality of this board.
>I let the studio itself become part of the context in which the work exists
To an extent this could also extend to your mental workshop no? You look into magic and it influences your work. Change your philosophy and that too will shape the piece. Define your ideology and then to exploit it, generate contrasts, do plein air in a church! But then of course it has to be recontexualized into the gallery/studio space. Become a minister?
> It's possible to return to the old, without ignoring the new.
No point returning to the old anyway, that ground has been covered well. I mean you could advance cubist methods in a modern context, but you're placing motion and representation on a damn pedestal and possibly moving further into already covered ground. Modernity happened and failed to produce much meaningful works, even more so with postmodernity. If you're going to paint some hardedge squares, at least understand that it's probably not going to give someone enlightenment, but please try, we need it.
>>2429898
>actually quite distressed about the amount of bs literature practitioners in the field feel they need to produce in order to present their work properly
There is experiencing a work and then understanding it, then understanding enough to put that knowledge into practice. We need that literature to explain for the future creators to understand just what the fuck is going on. It's not required to show and experience the work, it's needed to comprehend it. Like comments in code, it doesn't effect the execution but it does effect the developers that inherit the codebase. I mean I still don't understand painting with a vagina, but there is probably literature backing it up. Now separating bs documentation from valuable documentation is hard.
>muh old masters.
Based.
>And if you gave a shit about where I'm coming from, you're welcome to check out the manifesto I linked to.
Entire reason I'm here man. Gives more holistic view to the process.
>believe sincerity, transparency and acceptance of circumstance are important values in what ever follows.
Can you expand on this? Also I'm going to throw something at you, God never died, he's just been relegated to the space between your ears. Who's to say that this 'objective' reality that we've conceptualized from subjective experience is actually how that shit works out there?
>but to merely sigh and roll...
Can't photograph space marines.
> I figure the sculptures in this series as altars or idols of a fictional culture, risen from an irrational need for a system of belief in a world strangely void of meaning and built out of trash.
iPhone on a monolith, cellular jammer in the base. Critique that on instahoe you fucks. Approach the holy object with reverence to the peace and disconnection it brings. But I love the draws to contemporary society through fiction/gallery. Noice.
t.
>>2431311
>not learning about the work, relational aspect, doesn't matter what the object is, more so it's function.
This, a shitty painting is one where you see a boat, and simply recognize it as such. The function of art is to allow humans to enter into discussion. Controlling that language and tone is entirely the realm of the concept Artist.
Anyway I'm tired af and been painting all night, keep bumping the thread OP
>>2431191
My main point is that old masters aren't hipsters nor would have they been considered. Even if the term has now been developed to encompass anyone who isn't in the contemporary mode, that still refers to our contemporary age most particularly, and is not a problem of the past. I still stand that the spirit is completely different.
Nor am I saying that when one's work isn't understood, it is hipster art. That's different from what I had written. I wrote that it's one of the main virtues whereby it achieves esteem, along with other qualities. This is not a hard and fast rule, of course, and for something to be be called hipster-ish it has to have some other qualities that we as a culture associate with that word. There are even works that just by their aesthetic qualities, regardless of the meaning or if it even has any at all, we can gauge that they were made by hipsters. eg Brooklyn artists.
Poussin's works are among the most mysterious and often have elusive meanings that are shut off from us, but that's not nearly enough for him to be considered among the class of people we instantly recognize as hipsters. I'm not at all against art that requires thinking to achieve full appreciation. I myself create large-scale allegorical paintings informed by classical mythology (as well as classical-Renaissance interpretations), philosophy, alchemy, iconology, poetry and poetic treatises, rhetoric, etc.
Alberti's comment in fact praises works that require thinking, but also that it isn't enough, nor is it enough for art to be beautiful. I mentioned it because, although any artist can claim that they work with aesthetics, it should not frustrate/alienate the viewer by the forceful imperative to think or overt strangeness, which plenty of hipster arts do.
And again, my main point is against the notion that old masters would be considered hipsters. My previous post has nothing to do with the things that went on before hand in this thread.
>>2424349
>>2424350
>conceptual discourse
>relational aesthetics
>performance, installation
>appropriation of found object/raw materials, personal items, etc.
>part of a project
>operating on the boundary between reality and fiction
>Predominantly I work in painting and installation, but I see the studio situation as a performative vantage point for relational work, and have adopted Bruce Nauman's approach to art making.
>I've created a whole situation surrounding my artistic practice, occupying space rather than showing much "real" work
This all screams "Emperor's New Clothes", except that you missed the time to liquidate 40 years ago, and now you're trying to buy the dip, pretending it's going to be popular again.
>I'm a multidisciplinary artist
Yeah, you and everyone else. Do any of you "meta-postmodernists" ever take time to read each other's artist's statements and realize they are almost completely identical bar the order of the sentences (which still tends to never have an effect on the message)? You all use the exact same jargon, the exact same faux-naive grammar, all trying to sound like your native tongue is German or French and you just can't help but sound exotic and charmingly naive.
You all seem to think you're pulling the wool over everyone's eyes, that they can't tell that your "manifesto" is a contract designed to eliminate personal responsibility from the artist and dump all the bulk of the work onto the viewer. It's ingenious, really, but do you sincerely think you're getting away with it? Who supports you? Who are your clients? Are you even breaking even? Do you at least enjoy the spoils of your cons?
Also, you may have adopted Bruce Nauman's approach to art making, but boy, let me tell you, you're no Bruce Nauman.
Most of the people who browse /ic/ have no idea what you're talking about and are going to think it's incomprehensible nonsense, and that you're just confused or mistaken. The truth is that you're a wolf in sheep's clothing.
OP here
>>2431311
No joke, my shinbone got fractured. Not Canada, though - Scandinavia.
>most of this board is interested in concept art, basic illustration and webcomics.
I suspect that we are entering semantic challenges ITT. Not a major point, but do you differenciate between 'conceptual art' and 'concept art'? My guess is that 'concept' in this case refers to what ever people in the game/movie industry are drawing for any given [sci-fi/fantasy] vehicle/costume/weapon/alien/etc design.
>anything that can exist in a gallery context.
Thing is, anything can exist in the context, as long as there's discursive merit for it. I've mentioned relational aesthetics. One of the first examples of this is examplified by artists preparing meals in the gallery, thus rendering the act of eating and talking around the dinner table the subject matter of discourse. Without having any say in the matter of content, by creating this specific situation, the artist suggests that the conversation and arena for social interraction (or lack thereof) becomes the 'piece', and the food, gallery and visitors its medium, through the gesture of presenting a social activity more every-day than what the idea of a gallery initially is intended for. What I find interesting about this concept, is that it's more common than one should think, seeing that we've since the days of saloon galleries held 'vernissages', the private views before exhibitions were open for public view. The word 'vernissage' is French for varnishing, and it was common to varnish the paintings during the opening night, as a ritual celebrating the completion of the works. This tradition was an oportunity for the artists to invite their patrons and other buyers to an exclusive viewing of their work, overseeing the finishing touch. The opening night or private view is still conventional, but usually open to the public, and in my view the setting for a relational element to the gallery visit in an of itself.
Does /ic/ even visit?
>>2434358
>Does /ic/ even visit?
only exhitibions of museums, really
OP again
>>2431311
>Honestly use a trip and shitpost
I'm glad you're being optimistic, mate. My hopes weren't high, but as long as someone appreciates the opinions of outsiders, (or in this case, 'insiders',) I might start posting in other threads.
>To an extent this could also extend to your mental workshop no?
Yeah, this guy gets it. I'm starting to blur the boundries between magic(k) and art (and everything else, really) - DifferenTiating is just a mental construct. As Joseph Beuys famously said: Everything is sculpture, everyone's an artist.
What finally renders somethis 'as art', is presentation. The content of my sketchbooks, storages and computers doesn't amount to anything other than potential - and the same goes for finished and unfinished paintings as well. It requires some relational element (visitors at a gallery, family going through my stuff after I died, it being the subject for a tv interview or the production of a retrospective catalog, future archeologists discovering my studio after the apocalypse, what have you,) before there's any point in calling it art. Until it's presented, it's just part of the make-up of my studio situation. Or, the reversal, it's already art even before it's conception. Art is a state of mind, just like chaos magick, spirituality, politics. The produce is simply what one fixate on, as the subject of phenomenological and intellectual examination - When you walk out of the gallery, the influation persists, even as you can't experience it's physical presence, or yours to it. The physical object itself is not what the art is. I reserve my right to produce paintings without having to call it art.
>you could advance cubist methods in a modern context
Not sure if you're the same anon as >>2426291 but I'm not really interested in cubism or neoplasticism. I got to stress one important thing, though
>Modern =/= contemporary
>>2434358
>game/movie industry are drawing for any given [sci-fi/fantasy] vehicle/costume/weapon/alien/etc design.
Yeah that's what I'm defining as concept art. Conceptual is the name I'm using for what you're doing and other works that attemp to construct and communicate an idea over simply presenting pretty images.
>opening night relational
Really the only time worth going to a gallery. Meet the Artist, meet art dicks, discuss pieces and bounce ideas off each other and get some liquor in you. Walked off from galleries with women to use as models and fuck, so that's another benifit. After that though the gallery becomes a ton less appealing, the works simply existing on walls outside of any social context.
At this years Nuit Blanche (street art festival, seven block strip) there was a piece consisting of a 5m tall wall of seran wrap (constructed by wrapping a square around the streetposts of an intersection. When walkers came across the installation they mainly just walked around it or stood in front of it. The act of standing however forced others walking to either stand or walk the long way around. Eventually there was a point where the viewer could not leave and was forced to engage the piece and walk through it. Then group behaviour kicked in and others followed suit through it.
Me and buddy picked up on that and started running full tilt into the walls from the inside. Other people got on the train and we left to see other exhibits. A half hour later people were still throwing them selves at it as we were, chain reactions. So we started getting destructive with the piece and had 25people actively tearing this down artist running around the whole time with plastic wrap. By the time it fell, we were crushing darts off to the side loving it.
That would be relational, yes?
http://danielgriffinhunt.com/Portal
There is absolutely nothing new or interesting you're doing that hasn't been done by every other asshole that has graduated art school with a BFA for the last 60+ years. You can throw around a dictionary's worth of $5 words and pretentious esoteric jargon but that still doesn't change the fact that all you and your ilk are doing is trying to find new ways to sell snake oil.
>>2434360
And do you agree that the museal context of the work influences your perception of the paintings hanging on view? Would you see them exactly the same if they were hanging in a white cube gallery? Would your experience of being in the same room as other gallery visitors be equal to that of an art fair?
if you've ever been to the National Gallery in London you might have noticed the high polished wooden ornaments, the dust green and rose tinted, textured wallpaper. The way some visitors move slowly from room to room, some rush to get to the Rembrandt wing for a quick fix, while others sit for hours in front of the various Caravaggios. This is part of the experience, friend. You won't ever be able to isolate paintings from their surroundings, and you're not meant to.
>>2434383
Yeah same guy, you can tell by my language, phrasing and reply method. Most of this thread is me and you. Be we are anon and I am we.
>modern != contemporary
Oh of course, I just like playing with motion and have problems keeping the world still for my easel. :)
Some paintings create art, others are just paint. Diggin it.
When I was an engineer, all problems looked solvable in software. For a carpenter every problem requires a hammer. Felt debased when I started painting, there is no one right way to do it. No objective measure.
It's freeing.
Will be back in a few hours, this thread is the only reason I keep coming back to this shithole.
>>2434389
>And do you agree that the museal context of the work influences your perception of the paintings hanging on view?
I think it depends, really. Installations and exhibitions with multiple pieces, the environment it's placed in seems quite important to how I will view it. A singular Rembrandt, I think it's important to have lighting, that the environment makes it so the viewing experience is more pleasant. My point being that it's not the environment making it look better, but that it always looked really good. The environment only makes you able to see that goodness.
>>2434384
Haha, great! Yeah, that's pretty on point.
I'll bookmark your web, dude.
Forgot to give you mine, check your email.
>>2434386
My concern is that people like you are to anxious to get results. I'm not doing or presenting what I do with any conviction that it's what the world needs to progress, but I know it's important to me. To choose to have a website, studio, gallery contacts, buyers, etc., isn't something my art should be descriminated because of. Obviously, I could just hide away in a basement and continue to make things that will mean nothing to most people, and completely avoid the very few that could potentially appreciate my work, but at least I'm trying to see my situation juxaposed to this quite common notion that it's meaningless.
I was young when I decided to apply for art school. The only reason I did, was that I enjoyed painting, had been consciously aware of my enjoyment in drawing since the age of four, and according to everyone I met, I was quite good at it. I knew close to nothing about contemporary art, had never read any art theory, just had a general knowledge of art history, and in general had no idea of what I was doing.
And then art school happened.
What I'm interested in examining now, is in what way my development can embrace ground from which it can take the best from both worlds; To contribute to a common future in art, where outsiders, contemporary, formally educated artists and traditionalists alike, can appreciate the larger purpose of creativity, from different approaches, rather than concealing their inherent principals and goals from each other, and so fiercly excluding everything that touches outside of that approved by the respective schools.
That's not to say that I can't focus on my main interests, it just means that it shouldn't be required of my work to tell the entire truth. It's part of a bigger whole, just as the paintings made by people on /ic/ is. You talk as if I'm doing damage to history. Us vs them.
>>2434408
Still, viewing a single Rembrandt in a silent museum with perfect lighting, you couln't avoid the sacrality of that situation - just as you wouldn't be able to ignore the opposite if you saw the same painting hanging in a shop with your Warhols and your Banksys. Can't separate paintings from their environments, mate.
This is why white cubes exists. It's the closest we get, but even then, you're standing in a white cube, which also can't be ignored.
Painting happens in a situation, and even more importantly, your body is part of that situation. Without the phenomenological aspect, we might as well just talk about the things we see in our dreams.
>>2431334
>We need that literature to explain
We need it to the extent that it can uncover things we might be missing just by looking at the work and making the connections we are set up to, individually. But it's inevitably tautological. I have collected every single press release that I've gotten my hands on from all the exhibitions I've seen the past ten years, but I've only read 1/4th of them, because I'm content with what I got out of most shows. The one's I'll read are the ones explaining work I'm mostly confused or provoked by, to give it a second chance. But if I'm into a certain piece, in most cases I won't read about it, unless the subject is something I'm working on myself, to inform my own work.
>sincerity, transparency and acceptance of circumstance
I feel as if young artists, especially those with a formal education, but also autodidacts, to some extent are either very aloof or apologetic. The art school environment isn't void of competition - everyone wants to be the best, like in most walks of life - and this distracts from the art itself. It becomes -about- the artist, rather than the art, and the artists are too often ashamed to let the art be what it is, which unavoidably is part of something in development. It's ludicrous to expect that something a twenty-three year old made is a masterpiece, but in the art world we/they talk as if it should be, as if 3-5 years of art school guarantees that you become a genius. I believe that most people graduating would contribute more true value to the world, if they remained more human, more 'folk', and proudly admitted that of course they aren't sure, of course they don't fully know, how can anyone be sure? Artist statements are too certain, to insisting, when they should only serve as an invitation to discuss purpose and direction. Art produced should propose that this and that subject is worth contemplation, but the art world acts as if it's the end-all, be-all of its respective field.
>>2431334
>God never died
> Who's to say that this 'objective' reality that we've conceptualized from subjective experience is actually how that shit works out there?
Nobody. Everybody.
The way I see it is that if you can express it in any way, including language, it's true enough. This is where Eastern Philosophy enters. One truth does not exclude another. This is also where quantum physics enters.
I can't think about something that doesn't exist, because thoughts are real. And the same goes for paint.
>iPhone on a monolith
Yeah, this guy gets it.
Any knowledge of Jacques Vallée?
>>2431958
I think our argument is a semantic one. If you're going to use the expression 'hipster' about things that really aren't, you might as well start using the word more generally, like 'idiot'.
You have a point, obviously, but so do I. I don't need any knowledge of the fact that Poussin is mysterious in order to appreciate his paintings. To be quite honest, I never really developed a taste for his art, possibly because of his palette. Why is there always someone in a blue robe? (Personally, I can't admit to that colours in painting have symbolic meaning, unless we're looking at something monochromatic, or to some extent a harmonic gradient.)
My point is that if you approach works of at that unavoidably do have some element of mystery (again, I'm not comfortable with this expression either. If it's possible to understand given the right amount of explanation, by principle it's not mysterious,) that's not reason enough to dismiss it as useless shait. Some things in life are actually alien to us. Why should we avoid making art about what we can't fully comprehend?
If it's in the same room as you are, and it has a sensual dimension, that's really all you need to begin to appreciate it. If it operates with codes, signs and symbols, then that's more to get you going. If it on top of that have a title and a press release, you can look further into it's meaning, but you don't have to go further than the sensual, just because the other requirements are filled. If you don't appreciate it for its idiosyncrasies, fine, but that doesn't mean that every piece made by the same artist depend on the same methods, nor that what you're looking at is hipster-art. To be frank, I would be more suspicious of curators easily falling into the category, than artists. And also, who gives a shit? There's thousands upon thousands artists in the world. It's not that hard to get into art school, the art world is bound to have decadent, idiot hipster shitheads gravitating towards it.
>>2433335
>missed the time to liquidate 40 years ago
Oh
>almost completely identical
Except when it's not
Read the thread, family. >>2429898
> I do not talk or show people/the audience a lot if what I've written, unless the text itself is suppose to be published as a work in and of itself
>I write very simple, very phenomenological with a mix of the poetic, and half for the exhibitions I've had in the latest years, I haven't even had a press release
And if I happen to produce texts that fall into what you're trying to describe, I'm painfully aware of the fact that it's Art Speak. What you might not know, or maybe you do idk, is that most press releases aren't written by the artists themselves. Even so, a lot of people working in the arts see what you're talking about as a problem. But it still doesn't apply to all.
>German or French
Actually, my native toungue is Norwegian, so there's that. I don't pretend to be exotic, nor charmingly naive, and I don't expect that I do either. You point is moot.
>contract designed to eliminate personal responsibility
How strange. I see it as the exact opposite, since it encourages artists to come clean about the faults in the system, to stop hiding behind a screen of gallerists, art dealers, speculants, collectors and flippers, magazines, critics, historians, fairs and directors, and rather create something that actually has meaning, and to work with emotions and pathos, grand narratives and other such notions that the postmodernists despise. No, I benefit infitinely more from talking with my viewers about possible problems and the potential of improvements, and end the conversation with a pat and a handshake, than to have som gallerist present it to consumers as something fully achieved, in order to profit.
>do you sincerely think you're getting away with it?
I'm interested in finding out in what way I should be.
>Who supports you? Who are your clients?
Ordinary people.
>Are you even breaking even?
Nope.
>>2433335
>you're no Bruce Nauman
I should rephrase that. I'm sympathetic towards Nauman's approach. He's not the only one I'm sympathetic towards. I'm also into Joseph Beuys, among others.
>The truth is that you're a wolf in sheep's clothing.
What are you talking about? I'm being completely transparent. I knew most people in /ic/ wouldn't get it - it's a cartoon image forum. I could just stroll straight into the art academy, two minutes from my studio, lay down on some couch, smoke a spliff and talk about glaze medium with art students who've only ever heard of linseed oil, but I thought this would be more rewarding. Am I disturbing the peace, guy?
>>2434542
Having been to art school and observed and studied the general trends of art in the past couple centuries one will notice that modernism and postmodernism has led artists away from a central authority, an organizing principle, the church, god and country, towards decentralized narcissism and nihilism. Artists now either work for corporations or themselves, promoting either the cult of individuality and other disorganized New Age philosophies, or hedonistic consumerism. As usual, the intellectuals think they're liberating the masses from oppression, when in reality they're leading them into addiction and depression. Those who are persuaded most by art are the ones suffering the most from its lack of purpose. You think you are doing something "good" by pursuing "more meaningful" smaller, more intimate conversations that you perceive to be more honest and transparent, when in reality you're just stirring the pot, rattling the ship, making consensus and a sense of community harder to achieve by encouraging and reinforcing variety of opinion and values.
> No, I benefit infitinely more from talking with my viewers about possible problems and the potential of improvements, and end the conversation with a pat and a handshake, than to have some gallerist present it to consumers as something fully achieved, in order to profit.
Congratulations. You're still as much of a parasite as those "dishonest" artists that do make a profit. Being poor and transparent doesn't make you a better person. You're more of a drain on society if you're constantly in everyone else's debt than if you were making a profit. Also, talking about problems and possible solutions is not a solution. It is the definition of mental masturbation. For all the time you spent considering hypotheticals, there are people working on solutions, actually trying to fix what you'll inevitably feel good about yourself for predicting at some point. It's just self-satisfaction. You help no one.
>>2434553
Since you've already decided that I am the scum of the earth, I don't even know what competition you'd have me lose in.
I don't remember claiming to be a good person, and I haven't suggested that my art should benefit anyone else. However, I do propose that the creation of images do influence change. What kind of change, for whom and to what extent, that depends on the image and its creator.
What you should consider, is that art existed before central authority, an organizing principle, the church, god and country, without being narcissistic or nihilistic. I trust that we will find some common purpose again, and until then I'll just be on my own, helping my self.
>You're more of a drain on society
Yet again, you don't know what you're talking about. I'm Norwegian. Ever heard of Norway? Numbers came in today, and last year the Norwegian Pension Fund (also called Oil Fund) made 39 billion dollars (with a b) last year. Each year some of this money trinkle down on artists, as well as other citizens. Last year the government handed out 34 million dollars to artists working in this country. They do this every year. Thousands of artists apply for this, and a few hundred get funded each year - and I'm asking for none of it.
Not asking is part of my institutional critique. I WANT to see how I'll get out of my own depts without any schemes or taking advantage of monetary funds that artists in most other countries don't have access to, and I intend to do this with honest craftmanship, hours of hard work and reasonable pay. Your point is moot.
I'm not your enemy, it's not me you're angry with.
>>2434497
Not my email or work, but I'd love to see your jazz. IG vpzero , [email protected]
The only truth is a truth composed by infinite conflicting truths. The concept of Buddhist emptiness turns me on.
No idea on Jacques, seems like a decent CSdink, anything you'd recommend?
>>2434505
What's the difference between a photograph and an abstract of a photograph? How you look at it. If you recognize it as a location, the fact it was taken with a camera, that's a tree, maybe there's a date external knowledge comes into play. You can just look at the arrangement of colour and form.
>sensual dimension
My girl creates Abstract works in a mystical sense. The colours and forms hold internal mean, but unlike Kandinsky she can't codify it. The works still have power and are pleasing, but can't be rationalized.
Blues are conflict, orange is love, I am purple (constant source of emotional stresses), she is teals, purples are spiritual, yellows are energetic and obnoxious, greens are depression, chroma is intensity, values are time. That's all I can gleam, its internal and opaque.
But it still looks good.
>>2434542
At least someone else can appreciate spliffs and glazes. +2 my Nordic nigga
Painting then off to work. Stay stuck boys
>>2434588
>Ever heard of Norway?
I have! What made you think otherwise? I have some number for you too...
http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/visualize/tree_map/hs92/export/nor/all/show/2013/
Most (80%) of your country's GDP comes directly from oil, technology to drill, refine, and transport oil. Your wealth didn't fall out of the sky. Not to mention that you have a homogeneous population of approximately 5 million, covering an area roughly the size of California (which hosts 38 million), whom 99% (minus recent immigrants) of are literate. I wouldn't expect less from you.
>honest craftmanship, hours of hard work and reasonable pay
My father was a craftsman, and his father was, and all his brothers were. You're not a craftsman. You're not fooling anyone. How is what you have posted a demonstration of craftsmanship, or craft of any form? How can you not see how out of touch you are from reality? Your work is neither functional nor decorative. It defers to no standards or conventions of a trade. It REFERS to trends in post-modern formalisms. You're pumping out some of the most generic of post-modern cliches. How can you not see how shallow your imitations are? How can you not see? This is why I left. You people would come into critiques with the same things, and act all innocent like you didn't know everyone working in the studios next to you was doing the same exact thing. You all had the gall to put on an intellectual performance, defending the originality of your work. You look through any "hot" gallery in Leipzig or Berlin or Zurich or Chelsea or LA and they all have the same things. Non-sequiturs leaning against walls. Meta-ironic-post-inside-jokes. It is randomness for it's own sake, totally gratuitous.
You want to be an honest craftsman? Actually learn a trade. Don't con yourself with this absurd mental gymnastics of loose art historical association as justification. You're obviously level-headed and patient. Use it for something else.
>>2435646
I still don't get why you're being so antagonistic, I'm not doing anyone anything wrong. People who come to me get more value for their money than they expect to get, and I'm not forcing anyone. In fact, apart my store-front, I got my website advertised on a poster - one single poster - hanging in the window at an art supply store. I couldn't be less intrusive. The people I tutor tell me that with the techniques I teach them, other painting courses they've attended are a joke in comparison.
I might be a jack of all trades. My story might not be that interesting, but at least I'm telling the story I want to tell.
And if your were paying attention, you'd get that my main objective is to expose what's wrong with the picture. I want to encourage young people to avoid art school if they want to do art. The whole reason why I got this interest in discourse, is because I went - and aside from all the good it's done to my intellect, (well, actually what I've been reading after I graduated has provided me with much more, but my education paved the way,) it's been at the cost of distracting me from my development as a representational painter. What's done is done, I don't regret going to art school, but I've come to the realisation that creating images in the magical manner of my formative years, with the uninterrupted force I had during my years in the studio, before art school, is more true to my purpose. How I juxtapose that with my performative, relational and conceptual work, should encourage you to see our similarities in opinion, rather than trying to paint me as some sort of representative of everything you hate about contemporary art. It's not in my nature to jump ship; I'd rather try to steer the boat into open waters, and a safe return from cynical insincerity, and you should check your self as well, friend.
>>2435842
Magic in art? Point me in a direction great Nord.
>>2434505
>I think our argument is a semantic one. If you're going to use the expression 'hipster' about things that really aren't, you might as well start using the word more generally, like 'idiot'.
You're the one who said old masters would have been considered hipsters, which is about as false a statement as when certain people say the old masters created fan-art. I don't care about hipsters at all. I wouldn't have mentioned it if you hadn't. My point isn't about dismissing any art as "useless shite" either, even if I may or may not actually think that. The point, and my only real point, is that old masters wouldn't have been considered hipsters on the ground that it's a concept that's completely separate from their world view and process, whatever a hipster is, and that it isn't a criteria to do things never done before to be a hipster (which was your explanation on the original post I had responded to suggesting as to why old masters would have been considered hipsters). There is an essentially different quality of initial response between old master art (even from the old masters' contemporaries) and art made by what people today commonly consider hipsters.
>Why should we avoid making art about what we can't fully comprehend?
I never said we shouldn't. It's not within my powers, however, for the shared cultural perception to associate some arts with hipsters and some not, based on their initial response.
>Personally, I can't admit to that colours in painting have symbolic meaning, unless we're looking at something monochromatic, or to some extent a harmonic gradient.
As someone who's studied emblem books from the 16th and 17th century, I assure you they do even if it's something to be sensed rather than contemplated, though not always. Especially an artist contemporary with people who published works on analogy between philosophic concepts and color such as Athanasius Kircher, and who himself was both a student of color optics and poetic allegories.
>>2435876
Try the Chaos general in /x/
More specific, sigil magick.
Here's a 'chaos for dummies' introduction. Pretty good for starters:
http://www.philhine.org.uk/writings/pdfs/orchaos.pdf
More related to art, you might want to check out Austin Osman Spare, an early twentieth century artist, who coincidentally studied at the same college as me - the person who rediscovered the use of sigils in magical work.
>>2435902
Dude, you're hung up on -your- interpretation. If you zoomed out from history, and saw everything from the point the ancient Greeks pulled their fishing boats up from the ocean, and started to walk around thinking and talking about things, it would all fall under modern history. The Rome that fell is still in full operation, just under different guises. Your requirements for naming something hipster, is that they wear skinny jeans and create images that operate with an inherit concealment of code, perhaps with nothing but fluff at it's core, but consider this:
>Hieronymus Bosch
Excuse me for championing the suggestion that the expression might be used synonymous to "jester" or "fool". I don't mean to say that the people sporting this outfit are aware of what they represent, but from an anthropological view, you can surely find similarities with what even tribal societies had in the role of the shaman/sorcerer, (who also possessed roles that now, in modern society, are dispersed between scholars, healers and theologians) and the fact that these roles aren't typically something the 'common man' will fully understand or appreciate. Most people living in the golden age of painting wouldn't see any art outside of the churches, so to walk up to any old peasant living in Italy at the time, asking him about his honest opinion of the old masters, would in my best guess give you a similar answer to what you'd tell me about your thoughts on Shia Labeouf.
Just to be sure, I'm not talking about the intelligence, talent or integrity of these people here, I'm talking about the public opinion, and how a lot of people are as uninterested in the old masters as they are in contemporary art - a lot of people have no fucks to give in art, no matter. We cherish the old masters because of what has unfolded in history since then. In a different timeline, with different values inherited, we could as easily be mocking the old masters for their complete failure to be excellent.
>>2435902
As for the symbolic meaning of colours, it's totally subjective.
The other anon said green is depression, I'll go out an tell you that green is heart - because the only system meaningful to me, is the Chakra/Kundalini. But as I said, this only applies in monochromatic instances. Greens among reds and yellows doesn't have symbolic force in and of itself, as an isolated green, and at best it might reference some flag or other culturally sanctioned combination of colour.
>>2435646
By the way,
>You want to be an honest craftsman? Actually learn a trade. Don't con yourself with this absurd mental gymnastics of loose art historical association as justification. You're obviously level-headed and patient. Use it for something else.
Based advice, but I still feel the need to see this through. I came here asking for thoughts on my project, but I'm not going to scrap it. It wouldn't go away if I were to choose a craft in the sense you're implying, but I might find a different form for it - perhaps it will result in a book or a documentary, who knows - but the project is live, no matter what.
>>2436101
So carry it out to its logical conclusion.
An insurance scam involving fire at the reception.
>>2437265
I'm just visiting, desu, just doing my thing.
Don't let my thread tell you anything about the state of the board.
reformed lurker here. Too long too read or too lazy? which
And now you got me working Sigils and fucking my subconscious.
How do I apply this to painting?
>>2438833
If you asked /x they'd tell you it goes against the rules of sigil magic, but the way I understand chaos are more guidelines, and can be modified and broken. I guess you could just paint sigils, as you would any other graphic element, or you could get more creative - like drawing them out in gun powder and set fire to the canvas, idk
Maybe use sigils for underpainting, and base your composition from there. These ideas are just from the top of my head, though.
>>2426153
people post this image a lot but I think the painting on the wall on the right is actually pretty interesting.
>>2440648
I'm separating my reduced character set into groups by structure (blocky, diagonal, curves) dissolving them and combining them into transparent layers of wash. Here's a base coat from some diagonal characters.
Going for repeated abstracted sigil over one glyph.
>>2441472
Way to catch on, dude.
One of the reasons sigils makes sense to me is that I've wanted to introduce text in my paintings for a couple of years now (remember, I said that I can spend years on my projects - usually, because I take my time deciding whether it fits to make radical breaks from my overall body of work,) as a way to generate marks. I haven't done many with text, because I'm wary of bringing meaning into my work that distracts from the formalistic. However, abstract marks will fulfill my wish for generatively automated mark making, restricting me from making too much freehanded swirl, without becoming about the semantic messages.
Pic is the type of design I've come up with for my own sigils.
are you trying to create something visually appealing for people to enjoy the visual appeal of?
if yes, /ic/ likes you
if your art is all about thought and the pickings that go on inside your brain. go away we don't care. we want to make pretty looking things. if it looks good nobody needs to write anything to explain what it is trying to say. a picture speaks a thousand words, but in 2016, a thousand words isnt enough to speak a picture. s'm'h
this thread reminded me why I hate modern art, and inspired me to work harder as to not become a pretentious fuck like OP.
>>2442054
Yes, you like me. No, I don't need to articulate anything about my art in order to show it. I have made these tvinga clear in the thread. I just made the thread because, in addition to creating visual art, I also like to write about it discursively, philosophically, what have you. If this is incomprehensible, tell me and I will be happy to elaborate.
>>2442072
Please learn the important distinction between modern art and contemporary art. These are two different concepts. You sound like an autodidactive fool. Descerning what's good or not, has nothing to do with your taste. If you don't know this, you are both stuck and misguided in your ability to analyse visual aesthetics, I'm sorry to say, no matter which era you're looking at.
This thread is cancer, OP is a high-level bullshitting faggot and I can't believe /ic/ hasn't convinced him to fuck off yet.
>>2442698
So much for pathos.
This whole board is cancer, and I am the chemo. Your stupid bait just makes me want to spread, desu. I took my first art history class fifteen years ago - what do you know other than your regurgitated, sticky memepasta?
>>2442390
>autodidactive fool
Jesus you're even more retarded than I thought.
Please keep going OP, I'm getting a good laugh reading your cringeworthy posts
>>2442859
>greentext
Implying I need make any arguments
>>2442859
to be fair the response was a knee jerk meme response.
OPs art can be taken without all this text. This is just him explaining and defending it.
You know, the entire fucking reason we have critical art?
Keep being chemo OP.
>>2440680
>people post this image a lot but I think the painting on the wall on the right is actually pretty interesting.
No anon. It is just shit. Everything on that picture is shit.
>>2441472
>that image
so brave
>>2443081
so deep
>>2443139
Post your work.
>>2442853
this
>>2424349
This sculpture is, in my opinion, not good.
I think the fact that you posted your background is quite discouraging, also. I can't accept the "modern art" approach that the artist is more important than the art. It's a green can with some limbs sticking out with surgical implements attached. Sure, it ticks all the boxes needed for a pretentious search for meaning or to allow condescending "you just don't get it" discourse, but let's be real here... it's not pleasing aesthetically. It doesn't criticize,argue or imply ANYTHING, hell, it doesn't try to "say" anything at all. I can staple my own subjective interpretation to it, but I could do that to a public toilet. It's impossible to critique such an object, because it doesn't attempt to be or do anything. So despite the fact that I understand people who enjoy looking at such installations exist, I struggle to understand why this is being posted to a critique board. My suggestion is to start over. If you as the artist don't communicate SOMETHING deliberately to the viewer then in my opinion you have failed.
>>2443568
OP here with a quick response.
You haven't read the thread, so I'll repeat myself on thw following:
>it's a snapshop
none of the pics posted by me of my work are intended as proper presentational reproductions. I take great pride in how precise I am and how much time I spend when capturing, editing photos and creating such material, and I even make it my business to crop other artists' work for web reproduction, so your point about background is moot.
>you got no context
It's a sculpture. It exist in three dimensions in which you can move around relatively to the object and the space surrounding it. If you can't do this, you can't actually judge it by its own merits. The closest medium for this is video, but even that creates its own context.
>You're suggestion to start over is whatever.
If you read the thread, I already told you the sculpture in my OP is destroyed already. It was created to see if the sculpture held its weight and the materials held together with the chosen adhesives.
It's board is called Artwork and Critique. It's not Traditionalist Painting/Sculpture and Critique. I named the thread what the thread is about, and it's not about the sculpture in my OP.
If you haven't got an interest in conceptual, multidisciplinary work, don't bother trashing up the threads about it. I never leave a single comment on any anime thread ever. Not on any board. There wouldn't be a point to, because I can't care less about anime. That's not a judgement on the people who do.
>>2443743
I don't have no interest in conceptual work, you misunderstand. I think that YOUR work is NOT GOOD. The "Critique" part of "Artwork/Critique". If it is your opinion that I can't judge your work without seeing it in person - don't post it at all. This is not your blog. I don't want to read a bunch of bullshit about chaos magic and where you went to school. If "none of the pics posted by me of my work are intended as proper presentational reproductions" then what is the purpose of this thread? How do you expect to receive meaningful criticism? You're just blogging.
>>2443848
You're very welcome to critique the work in my pics, but please don't complain about the quality of reproduction, as I've made a disclaimer about fracturing my leg. I had an operation today, and I'll be on crutches for altogether almost fourteen weeks. I'm mostly writing from my mobile, and I don't have access to the computer where I store most of my images, at all times. This might appear blogish to you, but I also made it clear that my work is both personal and situational - and if you want to critique me on that, you'll have to do better than claiming that this isn't my blog. You might not like my response, but at least I'll have one, and it becomes a conversation as long as you contribute.
You don't think my work is any good, and I appreciate the honesty, sir. I really do, but I'd get more out of it if you told me what exactly about my work you don't like. So far you're mixing board policy, quality of presentation with not so much the content of my conceptual plans (again, I haven't finalised the metaproject yet, and yes I am in fact fishing for new perspective on it here, in order to see what ideas I might benefit from adjusting, adding or trashing,) as you've plainly rejecting the idea that I should be making conceptual work altogether - based on one shitty snap of discarded work.
Come at me, if you're actually invested in improving this board.
Oh boy this thread is still going? The cancer's strong in this one.
I wish it would die already. This guy's more of a delusionist than a pretentionist and his posts are giving me a headache.
What is OP's pic?grasshopperpukingbluevomit.jpg
>>2444108
>grasshopperpukingbluevomit.jpg
>tfw I laughed
>tfw this is the most creative critical response so far
>yfw by the end of this I'm going to take anon's advice and become a tripfag
>>2444118
So your work is this gallery, this act a grandiose comedy in which you are both honest artist and conniving conman. The documentation for this work is your paintings.
I think it's half scripted, half retro scripted. I was only pretending to be retarded, you see!
But how do the bills get paid? Art must be expensive! Art must be expensive!
How else will the rich deduct their taxes?
This is beyond the rich, you can't purchase a life actor. Maybe his incomprehensible sculpture, or pretty documenting painting. But for a fee you can buy a piece of the avant garde that's come again but not but is here but doesn't really exist (unless it's in the cube!).
My issue with your work is I don't have a structure to analyze it with. Not past Spider-Man with a camera.
Neat! (But that's not a critique)
>>2444395
>So your work is this gallery, this act a grandiose comedy in which you are both honest artist and conniving conman.
The studio/gallery is where the work happens. The con is that I'm appearing to be truly interested in doing anything beyond painting. I'm not entirely sure who's getting more conned - The audience, the art community or myself - but I've at least convinced myself that in order to get the recognition I want for my work, and more importantly allowing myself the privilege to create my work, it needs to bleed into other disciplines and principles than what my paintings are focused on in and of themselves, and first and foremost it's to do with the art space in general. This, however is not untruthful, but rather embracing my role as artist/curator, propegating a Situationalist tactic towards the creation of works of art.
To get some idea of what I mean by Situationalist, you can read this short article:
http://www.clients.iopan.co.uk/WYM/situationalist.html
>The documentation for this work is your paintings.
I rather claim my paintings to be testaments to the purpose. The documentation for my work is the space in which I've situated the equity-end of my practice, and the un-proportioned symmetry with costs - the monetary value of my work vs my personal dept. It get's complicated as you realise that most of my time in the studio/gallery, my work has not been available to the audience, and that the use of the art space has been unfruitful in terms of volume in my production. The finalization of my project will entail succumbrance to commerce, rendering painted products as commodity and currency - to further underline the crisis in the art world, with its lack of higher goals, grand narratives and a better class of artists.
Cont.
>>2444395
>>2444550
Cont.
I just want to paint. I think about painting all the time, visualising my work constantly, dreaming up novel ideas during sleep, but rather than painting as much as possible I allow as much empty space as possible surround my work. To explain this, I'd have to go into Eastern philosophical discourse, and I'll only do that by popular demand ITT, I think.
>>2444395
>I think it's half scripted, half retro scripted. I was only pretending to be retarded, you see!
You're half right in even questioning this. The point isn't whether what I claim to have done is true, it's to claim anything at all in order to evoke a sense of truthfulness by proxy. All artists (and gallerists/curators) operate with lies, in that they present literature as representative for visual art, and that this, even if elaborate and fully covering the clarity one could achieve by looking, is still depriving the viewers of the path they themselves should be free to discover on their own, with all possible digressions and loopholes included. Producing a literal narrative in which the visual work should be read will inevitably, possibly, edit out all the interesting, subjective ideas that might have arrived during the experience, had it been void of directions for how to read to work, and thus it is only a matter of choice how we talk/write about the work. You can create concrete, practical schemes and make all the discursive ties you want for your work, but you can choose to write about it poetically, and you'd do this to suite the audience or appeal to gallerists and collectors - Or you could do the opposite; just create the work intuitively, with feeling, and later find details inherent, either in the symbolically, or material, and deductively choose a fitting concept that lends itself to explain your choices, so that it may seem you had more intellectual reason for doing what you did. The apex of the lie in exhibition literature, and even more so the expectation that there should always be some available, is that it operates with a language that even artists and gallerists deem invented and null. This is the face of my institutional critique. To run with the lie that I know what I'm doing, and why it's important. The medium is the message.
