Friday, July 8, 2016

Predicting my Future.

This is an examination of my creative process. A proposal to myself of what I plan to do this summer.  Noting my initial expectations before a series of paintings begin and the surprises, disappointments and discoveries that ultimately unfold over time. 

This summer (2016) I plan to make a series of paintings on medium and small canvases. I’ll explore washy (acrylic) pigments as a way to capture subtle detail fluidly, avoiding rigidity. The fluidity of the paint will further emphasize the subject matter.  How fluid are the boundaries between our interior and exterior and between our environment and ourselves?

These paintings will continue to explore my fascination with the figure.  First the figure’s internal spirit’s relation to her external embodiment.  Then the figure’s relation to her context or environment. I’m interested in how these duals interact-the conflicts and communions that continually occur.  How the spirit is materially harnessed and how it immaterially escapes.

The individual’s interior is fluid, transitional and invisible and the exterior is fixed. The weight of the exterior cannot keep pace with the boundless interior. And what if the two do not line up? What if the exterior is not a reflection of the interior? How do we come to terms with the gap? Men and women, young and old, we all to greater or lesser degree feel at odds with our exteriors. A common feeling which most likely accelerates as we grow older. This chronic tension is what interests me.

And troubles me.  Why don’t the two line up automatically? Why must we brand, identify and style ourselves? Why do we care to? Is this superficial, petty, exhausting or futile? Doesn’t the interior spirit exude nonetheless?  As we spend time molding and manipulating our exterior to reflect what we think is a more authentic us who are we fooling?  Ourselves or others?

The figures I paint are female. I paint what it feels to inhabit a female form and the gesture corresponds. More than just feel the feeling I want to see the feeling. Just as a writer writes to know what she thinks.  So I paint to know what I feel.  This gives weight and form to a feeling and therefore importance. Painting suits to record and define a moving unnamed mystery in me. A painting is a fixed visual of my internal invisible spirit and more accurately aligns with my idea of authentic self-expression. More than my physical embodiment can.

This summer I will continue these themes of duality. Starting to focus more on the figure (internal/external combined) in relation to her environment and less on the figure’s spirit’s relation to her physical identity.  The figure will not dominate but be of equal importance to her surroundings.  How fluid will the figures be in their context? How rigid, awkward? As usual the results seen in my painting will most likely be the outcome of my personal developments in life. How free can I be? How much control and protection is necessary and how much is destructive? Where is the boundary between courageous vulnerability and dangerous vulnerability?


Perhaps this proposal is less of a stated prediction of my future production in the studio and more a conscious question.  How will my subconscious answer? The paintings will tell.


Friday, April 29, 2016

Karen Kilimnik Wins at Child’s Play



Karen Kilimnik says f--k you! …with cat stickers. Her recent exhibition at 303 Gallery in New York was hilarious and rebellious.  I love a bombastic Dana Schutz exhibition- don’t get me wrong - but it was refreshing seeing art that was not abiding by Big Boy’s rules.  While Schutz may respond to blows with blows, Kilimnik is staging a sit-in. All artists have the canon ringing in their ears but Kilimnik’s free-spirited artwork reminds viewers that play is the key to creativity. I wish artwork was called artplay.

It’s out of art-world vogue to admit that inspiration has anything to do with making art.  Instead pride is taken in strong work ethic. Perhaps it’s time to revitalize words like inspiration and fun and goofing-off instead of glorifying hard work and grit. Defining art as work-which of course it is-overemphasizes production and achievement rather than the ebb and flow, the ups and downs, the failures and experiments and simple joy of creating: of playing.  Of art-making.  Artwork can define the material production of art but to use it always without interweaving play creates a stagnant imbalance in both artists’ and viewers’ expectations. 

I compare Schutz to Kilimnik because Schutz is any easy bite, playing well within the aesthetic rules we know and know to love- grand scale, clever, complicated composition and powerful color and gesture. Kilimnik’s paintings in contrast seem underworked, washed-out, simple and anticlimactic. Too pretty and benign to be rebellious. But the act is courageous, in a “Frankly, I don’t give a damn” fashion.   Kilimnik’s glittering paintings and sticker sprinkled collages reintroduce free-spirited whimsy by opening what the viewer sees to questions and doubts of - is this good, is this valid, is this finished? A fresh reminder that art involves more than just finished product.  The product is merely a transparent container for the spirit that fills it.

The exhibition of Karen Kilimnik inspired me because it was spirit-heavy and product-light. To make Art that is grandiose, flashy or compositionally sound is not interesting to me because it is not an authentic expression of the human experience.  Where are the flaws, the failures, the struggles? Kilimnik’s art was small but forthright. What was there was laughing and pleasurable and honest. It sparkled, literally. Ultimately I believe that worthy art is authentic art. To authentically express takes time and dedication to peel away layers of adult and become child again. But more importantly it takes courage, to allow yourself to be vulnerable enough to be seen. No clever tricks or fancy tools to mask flaw or fragility or strange originality.

How brave can I be - Kilimnik style? Do I have the courage to put cat stickers on my paintings? The canon is a point of tension in my mind, lurking and judging and comparing. Pointing its’ finger to say - it’s not big enough, it’s not worked enough, it’s not clever enough. Do I have the courage to paint in a way that the canon has not deemed worthy? The wrestling match in my mind grounds my art practice, motivating my drive to strengthen my game. To win at artplay.

Tuesday, February 2, 2016

Tarot Cards




I titled my latest series of paintings Tarot Cards.  Though I know very little about Tarot I am interested in their relationship to Archetypes.   Jung believed that archetypes were universally and innately understood. That all of us, no matter our culture or education had an inert familiarity to these collection of traits embodied in various mythological figures. Supposedly the Major Arcana of the Tarot deck is based on Archetypes. 

My intention in this series was to allow the process to be the content.  I don’t conceptually premeditate paintings anyway, but the shift here was allowing the process of painting to become focal instead of peripheral. I chose to work on a modest size - 18 x 24 inches of 30 to 40 canvases.  The repetition is journalistic. By starting a new painting every studio session it became a visual record of my unconscious.




After posting some of these paintings on Instagram a friend of mine, who studies Tarot, commented that certain paintings reminded her of specific cards. The Tarot cards she suggested were aligned with what I was feeling/thinking during the time of painting. This confirmed my painting practice as a way for my unconscious mind to communicate with my conscious mind, personally as well as collectively. The images were figurative, mostly singular and somehow totemic.

My source material and inspiration is fashion photography.  Models can be viewed as contemporary versions of mythological figures or gods and goddesses.   Just as models are an exaggerated visual expression of current societal ideals so too are Archetypes and Mythological gods.




The Tarot series and my paintings in general depict my personal ‘Hero Journey’. Pictorially displaying my process of untangling emotions intertwined with contextual identity and self-discovery. Through Tarot Cards we seek objective illumination of our inner struggles and triumphs, finding security knowing that we are not lost on our journey nor are we alone.   


Saturday, July 28, 2012

Ugly love for Louis C.K.


Why do I like to watch Louis C.K.? I need to write it out because every time I tell my friends I fumble on a worthwhile reason. It is worth watching in the way that Lena Dunham’s “Tiny Furniture” is worth watching. And Sheila Heti’s book “How a Person Should be” is worth reading. Because it exposes the UGLY.

It is appropriate for a backlash of this sort to come about with the overuse of photoshop to create visual human perfections. One recent subway ride I stood behind a young boy as he learned how to use Photoshop to erase the lines around an eye and pores on a cheek. The step-by-step process was a step-by-step slide into my morning depression. Why spend time doing this? Learning how to do this? Why is this a high demand job? Why is it even a job? The exposure of our frailties hold a weak link that is a powerful opportunity to connect to others. It shows that we need one another and are not perfectly suited to go it alone.

Louis C.K. pronounces his ugly more than we want to hear. But the force of it, the exaggeration of it is what makes it art. It separates it from the day-to-day mini-doubts that are our realities and not so hilarious. The glaring ugly that Louis exposes is what sticks in our minds as an abstract notion of dirty human-what we all are. But...and of course there has to be a but, because dirty human is not enough. Dirty human is pathetic and a hopeless dead-end.

But Louis C.K. contrasts his UGLY with sublime. Little moments of dripping love show through. These are not grand or glorified, they catch you unaware, that is why they are sublime. And the moments are about love. They are about love for life, love for strangers, when it is awkward and socially clunky, love for ones’ children, messy and unconditional. Sexy, slippery, yucky, mojo love, brotherly love, sisterly love, motherly love, scared love, fearless love, love from behind and straight ahead, in the peripheral and far away.  This is why the UGLY is acceptable, because there is, when you get to the real grit of being human, so much LOVE.

Breathing (city vs. country)


I wrote the following for an application to a residency in the French countryside.
I’m posting it because it expresses my current thoughts about where I am literally located, New York and also where I am in my artistic practice.

I am a painter, living in Manhattan, New York. The city that is famously stimulating and motivating but notoriously overwhelming. I am currently living in New York because I want the energy of the city to influence my work. Contemporary city society attacks our sensitive and vulnerable selves, forcing us to build shields of protection. I am interested in the complex nature of this challenge on the individual. How it creates an identity of superficial truth.

Here there is an obsession with the new and finding the unknown. People flock to New York to put a finger on the pulse, an ear to the ground. This is not a mental strain but an instinctual strain. Authentic engagement with a place comes from one’s presence in it. I trust my unconscious to be smarter than my thoughts, so I consciously place myself somewhere to soak up my surroundings, for better of for worse. My artwork deals with façade and how we present ourselves to the world in a physical, seeable way and also in a spiritual, invisible way. New York or any city, confronts us with a dualistic conflict of ourselves as vulnerable and powerful just by walking down the street.

But I crave time away from the ambitious speed. I crave long time for the freedom of long thoughts. Sometimes in the city the short spurts at which information flies at you causes a breakdown in personalized thought patterns. So consumed we are with catching the information which flies at us incessantly.  I need time to stop playing catch long enough so I can find time and build strength to throw the ball back.

At Camac I look forward to an opportunity to feel relief from the attack of the city. To look at my surroundings without feeling anyone looking back. The natural world is soothing in mysterious ways one cannot predict. I would like to visit Camac with the same method of conscious self-placement with the intention of receptivity to my surroundings. Safety is important in allowing oneself to be receptive. I find the natural world and a lower volume of humanity gives me this safety. At Camac I plan to listen beyond the ambitious NYC soundtrack.

My painting is concerned with the invisible and visible of an individual, particularly a female. In the city appearance is important and in an age of blogging and googling the image has taken an even more central place in how as individuals we navigate ourselves in the world. My previous painting series has dealt with issues of protection in the loosely archetypal guises a woman may choose to utilize, (femme fatale, pin-up grrrl, urban warrior, beauty/beast, #Goddess) within the idealizations found on glossy pages of contemporary fashion magazines.  I paint from fashion photography, reacting to the image with the subconscious-friendly practice of painting, which expresses my conflicting responses to a contemporary city climate.

Previously I have used the exterior as a vehicle to express the interior, now I am interested in using the interior to reveal the exterior. While still painting from fashion magazines I now allow myself to more freely extend beyond the reference material.  I view the Camac residency as a place where I can further explore the interior world because I will have less distraction from the external. I sometimes fear the sentimentality of visually tying nature to an interior landscape, but when I pair the natural world with the artificial world of fashion, seeking similarities and contrasts, I hope to go beyond the stereotype. I am still exploring female identity as seen and felt in contemporary society, though not limiting it to the stunted superficiality of fashion  seen only on the exterior. At Camac I want to allow nature and unseen magic to enter the equation.

Friday, March 30, 2012

Nothing GRAND, just of the moment.




The film, Pina, directed by Wim Wenders makes you cry, but makes you laugh more. This documentary exhibits the results of Pina Bausch, an artist courageous enough to search deep for personal truth. Attempts, brutal and desperate, are what it means to be human and these attempts are never perfect, rarely beautiful and often times awkward, futile and silly. But ultimately, in Bausch’s hands, these attempts are visual gold in spite of themselves, because their honesty touches the brink between joy and sorrow, confusing viewers as to whether to laugh or to cry.

Pina Bausch and Wim Wenders were originally intending to collaborate on this film. But because of Bausch’s sudden death before filming it ended up being an eulogy to her. There is a fresh sadness to the film seen through interviews with the dancers and their dealings with the unexpected tragedy.

The film was discreet concerning Bausch’s personal life and herself as an artistic personality. This was her wish in the collaboration with Wenders. There were no interviews, only quick images and video clips of Bausch. But those few glimpses were captivating. When she was young there was cunning in her eyes and her smile was sexy with irony. Then when she was older, with a face of defining lines, she had kindness in her eyes and openness in her smile.

But the documentation was created to focus on dance. Knowing nothing about Bausch, we are left with the bare bones of dancers who knew her and what she created through their movement. According to a few of their accounts she was a careful listener, commanding respect with an aloof air of seeing to the core of people. She uncovered and revealed bits and pieces from her dancers that they did not know they possessed. She was a facilitator. Bausch created dance out of exasperation with words because it allows meaning to exist without the limitation of one definition at a time.

Pina starts with the 3-D effect in great use. Swooping in on the male and female dancers (who are barefoot on a stage of fresh soil) getting close to the distinct faces, whom we later meet individually. Wenders has an affinity for a dark circus and the opening scene reminds viewers who is directing. The dancers are wet with sweat and dirt and the camera exaggerates the strange in the dancers faces and muscled, nearly naked bodies. This opening dance was abrasive to watch because of violent, self-inflicted gestures that were repeated in mass until the dancers looked bloody and beat, though it was only sweat and soil and they were their own perpetrators. The collective groups, separated into genders, seemed like an army, but instead of directing the violence outward, it was self-inflicted.

The thing that Bausch and Wenders share is an affinity for the grotesquely beautiful. The swiveling of hips in a simultaneously seductive and ridiculous way. The sexy and the silly. The old and the young. The constructed and the natural. Wenders highlights Bausch’s sentiment by weaving his typically outstanding musical selection through spliced moments of dance and interview. Wenders loves to take intimate, private moments to public places. And infuse everyday, normal activity with magic, whimsy, humor and sadness at the same time. These overlapping meanings point to life the way poetry does, without stating exactly, but hinting at the essential.

What struck me immediately about Bausch’s dance was her bold inclination to expose human futility, with humor and pain. The pitiful, willful trying humans do everyday was shown over and over in different dances. A body smacking face first into a wall. Falling, to get back up to fall again and again and again and again. To grossly generalize it can be said that life is encapsulated in these repeated scenes of silly, but silliness for awesome’s sake.

Beautiful free-flowing hair is a Bausch trademark (like trains for Wenders). The women’s loose long hair is at once beautiful and distracting. It gets sweaty and sticks to their faces. They must be aware of it and where it will fall, using it as another limb. Yet it is just one more obstacle for the dancers to encounter and try to surmount. Like dancing through water, or on wet stones, in soil, grass, close to a deep abyss, with other’s bodies or ultimately just with one’s own, the goal of course is an attempt to succeed. Yet what we see when we watch Bausch’s dance is failed attempts, over and over. That is certainly not the pretty package of success but it is beautiful and laughable and livable truth.

Friday, March 23, 2012


Bryn McConnell: Looked

by Rena Silverman Feb 29, 2012

BMc_3.jpg
Bryn McConnell at her studio. Photo by Rena Silverman.

Bryn McConnell’s studio door is decorated with a clean grid of inspirations. One piece of construction paper reads, Everything is an experiment, while Art ‡ Democracy, Kunst ‡ Kultur, ART = Humpty Dumpty, ART = YUMMY YUMMY—the words of the German painter Jonathan Meese—mark a small poster. There are fashion ads and post-its, a magazine tear-out of the choreographer Trisha Brown, and just above the door’s handle a small white paper that says, go too far and get messy. On the right, a long, narrow white desk holds a diet coke can, an iPhone, a desk lamp, a bottle of Advil, clear glasses, a copy of John Richardson’s Life of Picasso, The Cubist Rebel, and the wings of an open magazine. Across the SoHo studio—which can’t be more than 300 square feet—two large canvases of brightly colored figures hang from a low ceiling and dominate the room like a pair of eyes.

Bryn McConnell just had her first solo exhibition at the Frontrunner Gallery in early February.Titled Looked, the exhibition featured six paintings of iconic women, each of which McConnell made in the last two years. Linear brushstrokes dipped in vivid colors zigzag about in short rhythmic motions, just barely coming together to form the figures and faces that dominate the frame. Five out of six of these paintings were taken from her Re: self-reflection/refraction/reflexion series.

“These paintings struggle, with grace, to combine the sometime conflicting worlds of the individual’s exterior and interior,” writes McConnell in the exhibition’s press release. “The Form vs. The Formless. The Conscious vs. The Unconscious. The Seen vs. The Unseen. The Identity vs. The Spirit. It’s a battle with the self, in varying degrees of pretty brutality.”

McConnell’s exhibition opened just weeks after Willem de Kooning’s retrospective closed at the Museum of Modern Art, where a whole other set of six women hung in the center of the museum’s 17,000 square foot exhibition. De Kooning’s women started off as figures blending into backgrounds of abstraction and later became what Artinfo recently described as, “a tornado of paint barely contained by the picture frame.”

McConnell, on the other hand, uses Impressionist strokes and a Fauvist palette⁠1 to create female figures who thrive in individual environments. Willem de Kooning curved, swished, and attacked his canvas with heavy brushstrokes of oil paint (“Flesh was the reason oil paint was invented,” he once said, famously). McConnell chops, turns, and leaps across her canvas with the lighter lines of acrylic paint (in a 2010 Blog entry about Georgia O’Keeffe, McConnell wrote, “I curse whoever introduced [O’Keeffe] to oil.”)But—like De Kooning—McConnell can paint a ferocious eye.

Take, Re: Les Demoiselles de Miroir, for example. Here, a woman walks towards us, leaving two sharp reflections behind her. A pale green diagonal line runs down her face, highlighting one harsh, visible eye (the other is fashionably concealed by the dip of her hat). With a piercing gaze, she looks more at us than we do at her. Cold, confident, and draped in royal purple, the woman nearly breaks through the facade of the frame with her gaze.

The title of McConnell’s painting is just one of five that incorporates contemporary communication (“Re:” referencing the subject line of an email reply), but this one also alludes to Picasso’s Les Demoiselles d’Avignon (1907). Scholars consider this painting, which features five nudes in a brothel—four standing, three masked—the “first exorcism painting.⁠2“Perhaps McConnell’s clever spoof on the title for her own painting, Re: Les Demoiselles de Miroir (Re:The Young Ladies of the Mirror), suggests that a mirror can be just as threatening for a woman as a brothel.

In Re: Narcissister, a woman, presumably seated (although her legs are not in the frame)—with her back straight up against the right edge—bows her head over a large, round mirror, like a wilted flower. Drawn first to the top where her profile lingers, our eyes follow the woman’s gaze down a single trail of thin green paint, which dips into the mirror, revealing a full view of the woman’s face. Here, two bright aquamarine eyes pop, consuming us. We find ourselves devoured by the woman’s reflection, just as she too is by her own. Reds, blues, greens, and alternating streaks of white and black form the fabrics and hair of this woman. The background is a dark deviation from the incorporated palette of Les Fauves and the Impressionist strokes.

In Re: Self-Rejection, a woman is lying down on a bed of ribbed red, knees bent to the side, hair and head thrust to the back. Two dark high heels are the closest thing to our point of view. Perhaps she is somewhere tropical, or maybe on a roof of a Manhattan apartment, or far away in the South of France. We do not see her face, only her body, which, shaped like a receding figure-five, folds backwards into an expression of pain.

Re: Odalisque is what the title suggests, but in vibrant yellows and fiery reds. The “odalisque”—historically the lowest form of a female slave in a harem, often the sultan of Turkey—began as a fantasy subject in the erotic paintings of Orientalism, but became the widely adopted subject matter of 19th and 20th century French artists, most famously Matisse, who arranged an “Oriental” alcove for inspiration.⁠3

The largest painting and perhaps central force of McConnell’s exhibition, titled, Weight, is the only painting taken from her 2010 series, DELETE, in which she chose to obliterate figures with “slash-like” brush strokes. This distinguishable, white, 60×72 inch painting shows a woman lying down wearing nothing but boots, holding a bouquet of flowers.

Bryn McConnell was born just outside of Seattle, Washington to a political cartoonist father and a clinical psychologist mother. “I knew I would either be an artist or a psychologist,” says McConnell. She tried both at Western Washington University, but when it became apparent that art was the better route, she transferred to Pratt in New York. At the end of college, she’d fallen in love for the first time. She had discovered the work of Ree Morton. She gained confidence, and her paintings earned a more whimsical touch. After graduating, Bryn moved to the Czech Republic where she began her career as an artist. It was at this time in Prague that Bryn founded the concept that underlies her current exhibition. “Hiding behind a facade,” she says, “or a figure masked by fashion provided inspiration,” an idea she attributes to living in a foreign country and not knowing the language. McConnell says that she reconciled this problem by using appearance to “declare uniqueness,” in order to “socially present something on the inside.”

In 2008, McConnell returned to New York to earn her Masters at the School of Visual Arts. In 2010, she moved into her studio on Greenwich Street. One year later, McConnell was painting in her studio during an open studio tour, when Edward Symes, co-founder of the Frontrunner gallery in TriBeCa walked in. “We were extremely impressed with her work,” Symes says in a recent phone interview. “It fits in with what we are interested in, which is emerging artists who haven’t had solo show yet, people with a pretty clear social message.” He says. “If you start to look closely you see little hints that allow for a greater understanding of what is just beneath.”

For the closing exhibition party at the Frontrunner Gallery on a February 2nd, McConnell participated in a 13-minute staged piece with the Push Pops, a Bushwick-based performance group led by Katie Cercone and Elisa Garcia de la Huerta. According to their Go! Push Pops website, the Push Pops are a “radical, queer feminist art collective…geared towards engendering ‘Embodied Feminism’…[and] concerned with the expenditure and conservation of the self in relation to the Other.” Ms. Cercone and Ms. Garcia show this by adding a third libero member to vary each performance. On February 2nd, Bryn McConnell was that member.

“The main thing I could contribute [to the collective] would be my concept,” says McConnell, who originally described the group as “Feminist Dada,” one that in performance “usually ends up getting aggressive or somehow a little bit explosive.” The February performance took place against the back-drop of McConnell’s paintings. A triangle made of tape marked each of the girls’ places, where they walked out with scissors and chopped off pieces of each other’s clothes, drawing on each other’s faces with bright pink-red lipstick. At one point, McConnell, who was originally dressed in lacy black skirt, barely had more than a bra and rags on, while the other members had lipstick all over their faces. But somehow it worked. At times, the girls even looked like McConnell’s paintings had come to life.

Bryn McConnell lives in Hells Kitchen and aims for the 11pm-7am sleep schedule. In the mornings she goes to the studio; in the afternoons deals with the “computer stuff”. Yet, no matter what, she finds time to write for half an hour everyday, “Even when it is boring.” A habit learned from her “bible,” The Artist’s Way. “It is good for me to write about what I watch and experience,” she says. “It helps me understand what I am doing in my own work. “

In evenings, you can find her at the gym, spinning or yoga class: “I get really good ideas in spin class sometimes.” Sometimes, however, it’s just about doing nothing, an idea she learned from reading a profile on Marlene Dumas, the South-African born artist and painter who stressed the reality of limitation of the human body and the psychological value of doing nothing. “If I hammer out work day to day it just ends up looking like work,” says McConnell.

McConnell does not like to paint in front of others. Only once, while pursuing “Alice Neel-style” portraits of her friends, did she do it. “I am definitely extremely protective of my alone time to paint,” she says. “It is a heavy weight for me to be seen, which is probably why the content of my work deals with façade!” Lately, however, her curiosities have shifted from fashion-as-facade. “My interest of late is more with older women,” says Bryn, “Women whose power and strength, beauty and sexuality exudes even through faded and wrinkled flesh.”

McConnell, who has not been to her studio in over a month, worries that she will forget how to paint. At the same time, she says it isn’t worth getting too regimented. “Creativity is like looking at the sun, you can’t look at it directly,” she says. “I look instead where the light falls.”


1. King, Sally, interview by Rena Silverman, 27 January, 2011, New York, NY.

2. The Museum of Modern Art, MoMA Highlights, New York: The Museum of Modern Art, revised 2004, originally published 1999, p. 64.

3. Odalisque, The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Art Terms. by Michael Clarke and Deborah Clarke. Oxford University Press Inc. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. The New York Society Library. 12 February 2012.

Girlesque - a collaboration between The Push Pops and Bryn McConell (full length version)

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Saturday, April 23, 2011

RE: series - Self-reflection/refraction/reflexion

RE: Fire?, 2010



The Obsure(d) Object of Desire, 2010



Narcissister, 2010



Self-Rejection, 2011




RE: Odalisque, 2010

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Diving out: Paul Thek

Paul Thek: Diver, a Retrospective at the Whitney Museum, 2010


Images of Thek’s work, and his name kept popping up, so intuitively I visited the exhibition at Whitney, knowing nothing about him beforehand. I actually assumed he was contemporary because his work looked so fresh in the images I had seen. Speaking of fresh…let’s start with the meat.


The exhibition begins with meat. A room of sculptures are rendered in highly skilled replication of juicy pieces of flesh, mostly encased in glass. Immediately David Cronenberg’s, Videodrome, screamed reference in my head. They are same in plastic, B-movie, sci-fi aesthetic with the outcome of gross, funny, cheesy and ridiculous. A great way to start off an exhibition, with a B-movie banger! So, let’s bang on.


The exhibition continued with a couple rooms of installation pieces. The gory, horror, flesh theme was surviving in various ad-hoc forms. The work was hokey, but unsettling. The arrangement of fake visceral compositions, piled in the exhibition setting was irreverent, either to the artwork or to the museum space I am not sure. Perhaps because the blood and gore was so obviously fake, it brought to mind mortality and the futility of perfection. The contrast of flesh and blood and decay in the pristine white wall space exposed this even more. Just as the installations dealt with the concept of decay, so they were decaying themselves, not meant to stand the test of time.


Following room after room of this maze presentation of a life felt uncomfortably intimate. The rooms of Thek’s paintings on newspaper and wood sculptures, where baby blue and pink reigned, were my favorites. They were smooth, graceful and genuine. These rooms made the work at the beginning look like it was trying too hard, the technical time and skill put into the work clunked like an old car. The blue and pink room purred. Simplicity in material and technique and color proved to elevate the same themes in his earlier work, except here he added a new element: beauty.


The exhibition carried on from here with ever more intimacy, with journals and pieces revealing doubts and questions of a spiritual and personal nature. The final room with paintings hung low to the ground made me cry, it makes me cry to think of it now, but in a fresh way, not a sad way. The way you cry when you say something true, something you didn’t know you knew. It sneaks up on you. (Of course, reliably, the wall text over-explained and over-sentimentalized the work.) An exhibition hung low is humbling to view. Meant for children, adults must bow or crouch down to look. This is modesty in visual eloquence. This humble, child-like work as Thek’s finale numbed the bravado of the exhibition’s beginning. The meat works are hearty showstoppers, but the true meat is found in the most simple, most humble, most honest heart openers.

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Check My Swagga Out

Les Demoiselles du Miroir, 2011

feminineSWAG


The Pin-up Grrl paintings arose from my usual interest in the collaboration of a woman’s interior world and her exterior presentation, or simply: feminine identity. Usually fashion as costume is my focus, but in this series I used a woman’s unclothed body to display sexuality, a mix of power and vulnerability.


Women’s nude bodies are attributed with a powerful ability to visually express sexuality, but to be naked is also a physical form of vulnerability. It is exciting to see a woman combine a sensual, wild, untrained freedom with a confident self-mastery: or feminineSWAG. The struggle for balance in a push/pull of power and vulnerability creates an interesting tension.


Burlesque is performance which reconciles the exterior and the interior. No one can see the inner you because the inner you does not have a tangible form. This leaves one free to fantasize and create a physical form of “inner innerliness”. Not only do you not know who you are, but you don’t know how others view you, so this leaves complete freedom to find a form of self-expression that truly amuzes (amuses/amazes) you.


To master ones’ presentation takes confidence in wielding the tool of one’s own body. But feminineSWAG can’t just look authentic, it has to come from an inner authenticity. For success to be achieved for both viewed and viewer there needs to be a collaboration of interest between the internal and external. Between a woman’s invisible spirit and her visible form. Just as glamour and fashion provide power to its’ wearer so does a woman’s naked body. Without clothes a woman still performs, but she must always perform for herself.


The key to good Burlesque as well as good fashion sense is to be skilled in self-objectification. The trick is to be able to view oneself without subjective bias from the outside. But does this concept hinder natural free expression? Don’t people want to be loved for who they really are, not just how they appear to be? But as I stated before, who are we really? Does anyone truly know? What “inner innerliness” are we afraid to express or not express clearly enough? Learning to objectify oneself, to see oneself as a container, knowing that it is only the exterior and doesn’t automatically reflect what is on the inside is an important lesson. This lesson is critical as a woman ages. My mother recounted that she is shocked when she looks in the mirror because it does not reflect accurately what she feels herself to be on the inside, a fresh 24 year old.


Stepping away from that ideal of young beautiful perfection is a form of self-respect. But as French women know best the exterior needs cultivation. And in a way that is playful and arises from the interior direct, with flaws, fantasies and all. Beauty is found in imperfections, which create distinction and leaves the general for pursuit of the extraordinary. FeminineSWAG combines the inner subjective natural with the objective artifice. The deep with the shallow. The truth with the lie. All for the benefit of a woman who looks and is looked at.

Thursday, April 7, 2011

Pin-Up Grrrls

Showgrrl #1, 2009

Pin-up Grrl #1, 2009

Pin-up grrl #2 (interior), 2009

over-exposed (black/white), 2009

double display, 2009

caught, 2009

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Fresh Inspiration, pay attention! Karen Kilimnik: currently exhibiting at 303 Gallery.



I walked into the single gallery room, a wide-open space and wished for a party. Definitely Champagne in fluted glasses. Besides the fact that it was an opening and many art world celebrities were there, there was a festive feel in the air. The celebration tittered from the work, which is light and playful, but glamorous all the while. Klimnik toys with the adult sophistication of fashion.


The room was cheap glamour, like glamour in quotes, but it was elegant and absolutely convincing. A poor-man’s Chanel fashion show. A few hints here and there to conclude style. Kitch paintings, awkward, gawky teenage drawings, a installation of photocopies, including a boot filled with crumpled plastic and fake pearls, with tinny music playing. Also some dark, amateur photographs and Ikea-esque chandaliers and music coming out of tinny speakers helped to reiterate this theme. This doesn’t sound like the scene of glamour. Isn’t glamour expensive and rich and decadent, not sparse and cheap? She achieved elegance with a surface touch. She achieved depth while entertaining (and being entertained by) the surface.


Kilimnik created a place that felt magical, even if the viewer only catches glimpses and hints, they added up to a world that one can enter into. Fantasy plays a large part in modern society though it isn’t often referred to as such. Dreaming is not something to brag about, results and progress and action are. It is now even the trend for artists, the professional dreamers, to be workaholics. But I cheer the dreamers. I understand Marlene Dumas and Agnes Martin who prefer doing nothing to always doing something. Imagination is fed by dreaming. Just the word, dreeaaming, slow and drawn out makes me think of lying in long grass, in shorts, staring at the sky while chewing a blade. Cramming for an exam does not whisper imagination, but rather screams ambitious goals of a mega-monster artist.


The reason I am drawn to Kilimnik is much for the same reason I am drawn to Ree Morton and Laura Owens. There is an element of space in the work. The work is simple but energized with something exciting, something beyond the material work. What is that? Is art adult-life dreaming? Jonathan Meese also considers art-making one big play-pen and I find this attitude freeing. It is modest and reduces art making to something a child does, rather than an ego enhancing career-choice. It may sound sentimental to wax on about innocence and purity and playing and dreaming, but the hard shells we grow into as adults could use some of this.


For the most part I tend to think of glamour as a constructed cold hard shell. One I love but have to consciously learn. It is something used regularly in urban society to protect that playful innocent and vulnerable child. So, I applaud Kilimnik for combining these two things, the cold with the warm, the adult with the child and the jaded with the innocent.

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Thoughts after Andy Warhol: Motion Pictures at MOMA




Warhol embraced the fallacy of a picture just as he embraced the fallacy of façade. He purposefully follows his obsession of surface appeal with the tool of video. Perhaps by investigating the exterior Warhol happened upon some interior?

Warhol’s exhibition at MOMA this spring (2011) is glamorous. Black and white large video screens confront the viewer, head on. Though the heads on the video screens are much larger than life, they transfix without overwhelming.

The sleeping video dominates the first room. It is the ultimate conceptual perfection of the limitation of what the exterior can reveal. The sleeper is lost in a rich world beyond the reach of visual documentation and we are left with a barely moving image of a head with closed eyes. There is no understanding of this person because there is no conscious communication.

In the second room each video screen shows a different approximate 4-minute filmed duration of each person. Watching these individuals you understand very quickly how they carry themselves in the world, how they consciously communicate without words. Some are tough, some are playful, seductive, artificial, calculated, serious, candid, but they all serve a purpose, to create a connection to the social world outside. Because who would we be without an identity?

Obviously we live in a visual-based culture. The exterior is valued and therefore manipulated with great care. The abundance of street-style and celebrity celebration is unignorable and imbued in self-awareness. An immaterial fantasy of oneself moves aside for a more material and true reality of oneself, based on photograph and video. Books are read less than movies and television. Celebrities are photographically sought after, face book pictures, paparazzi, everyone is looking at themselves.

A fantasy of oneself is necessary because we must learn to carry our intangible insides somehow. (Our soul?) We must learn how to operate in a society that unavoidably adheres to stereotypes and generalizations and categorizations. Are we truly ourselves only when we are alone? Where is the true self? Fantasy allows us to filter our true selves, to learn how to funnel something intangible and unverbalized into a form. We decide to lean left more or lean right based on how others react to us and our judgment of others. We become masters at playing ourselves.

Monday, February 28, 2011

Blahg Rules


These rules inspire this blog. As a painter in a solitary studio practice these rules help reassure me when doubts come to haunt. I appreciate their clarity and reason, just firm enough to be called “Rules”. While formulating a theme to help mold this misshapen mess of a blog with, I remembered these rules. Particularly Come or go to everything and Look at movies carefully and often because that is what I spend a lot of my non-studio time in New York doing. The beauty of living here are the cultural options, but I sometimes feel that my experiences come in and go out, leaving nourishment behind of course but also leaving a large portion to waste. This blog is my way of marinating my experiences…in the hope that I will extract from them even more flavor.

10 Rules for Students and Teachers from John Cage

Rule 1
Find a place you trust, and then try trusting it for a while.
Rule 2
(General Duties as a Student)
Pull everything out of your teacher.
Pull everything out of your fellow students.
Rule 3
(General Duties as a Teacher)
Pull everything out of your students.
Rule 4
Consider everything an experiment.
Rule 5
Be Self Disciplined.
This means finding someone wise or smart and choosing to follow them.
To be disciplined is to follow in a good way.
To be self disciplined is to follow in a better way.
Rule 6
Follow the leader. Nothing is a mistake.
There is no win and no fail. There is only make.
Rule 7
The only rule is work. If you work it will lead to something.
It is the people who do all the work all the time
who eventually catch onto things.
You can fool the fans, but not the players.
Rule 8
Do not try to create and analyze at the same time.
They are different processes.
Rule 9
Be happy whenever you can manage it.
Enjoy yourself. It is lighter than you think.
Rule 10
We are breaking all the rules, even our own rules and how do we do that?
By leaving plenty of room for “x” qualities.
Helpful Hints:
Always be around.
Come or go to everything.
Always go to classes.
Read everything you can get your hands on.
Look at movies carefully and often.
Save everything. It may come in handy later.

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Pipi’s Big Adventure

Pipilotti Rist embraces the second floor of the MOMA as her own by enhancing the surrounding windows with pink tint and plopping a round couch in the middle of the room. Seated comfortably a viewer can blissfully look at the rest of MOMA through rose-colored glasses. This marks the beginning of a feminization of the space. Though at first glance the psychedelia is overwhelming. The couches made for reclining, dope-smoking or making-out create a den atmosphere enlivened by a sock waft and the disproportionate amount of squirmy teenagers. But though the images are brilliant with colors, trippy transitions and unstable camera angles, this hippy facade is just a way of directing you into Rist’s trip of feminine exploration, where tasteful restraint is banished and sensual indulgences rule.

Rist’s roots as a punk musician are obvious in her older videos where she utilizes a sexual female aggression unique in live rock music. In Pour Your Body Out, Rist still channels this energy though more subtly through the pop sensibility of MTV music videos. Strong colors (blue strawberries - didn’t Smashing Pumpkins have those in one of their videos?) and flashy transitions are visually seductive in sophisticated MTV speak, a language the majority unavoidably know. But a definite diversion from the MTV aesthetic is the pace, which moves in slow motion helped along by the soundtrack of a haunting drone. This slowness emphasizes a dreamlike haze that floats the viewer through a techno-natural landscape where life is best experienced with the senses not the brains. The images are centered around the female body, with menstrual blood, orifices and skin all in a slobbery and tactile relation to nature. By using MTV as her weapon to beat out sentimentality Rist is able to refresh the historically burdened woman/nature connection.

Categorizing work as feminist is usually limiting because it binds the meaning in stagnant clichés. But artwork by female artists like Rist (I hope) are exposing the multifaceted meaning of feminism. Rist reflects a particular angle of feminism that Vera Chytilova encased in the film Daisies (which unsurprisingly is a huge influence on Rist). The women in the movie, or girls rather, misbehave without fear of what is proper or moral. They are totally self-sufficient (as prostitutes) and consumed in their own fantastical world which they shape in unconventional ways. Because of their unexpected behavior it is unclear where their dream ends and reality begins. These women are admirable because they escape entrapment of objectification. The attention their outside appearance attracts inspires their actions rather than stifles them. In Pour Your Body Out Rist also escapes entrapment by allowing a female experience from the inside and the view of her from the outside to intertwine. Rist creates a rich dreamland where Eve thrives in the Garden of Eden and the apple she eats with gusto does not imprison her but frees her.

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Q

"Style is the man when the man himself is a stylus - as in geomancy, when one's body becomes a seismic needle for registering, in ink or sand or some other substance, the signals of the cosmos. If the man is the instrument, then the figures he makes are both by him and not by him."
-Alexander Nagel, Questions of Style, Artforum, Sept 2010