CATCH UP II

So ALOT has transpired since my last blog. I am the worst at maintenance. It's why my hair is never sharply styled, my clothes never quite fit perfectly, and my eyes are sometimes bleary. It's a wonder how my plants survive me. It's why I'm a painter and not web-savvy. But I trudge along. Anyhoo, here goes:

I've just started my third quarter of grad school at The University of Chicago. It looks extremely promising and already hinging on an overwhelming load of work.

Matt and I just returned from Mexico. We met his parents at their time share in Cabo. You can't knock a free vacation. We needed it severely. Matt hasn't had more than a weekend off work for a year and a half! Our first vaca since the honeymoon to PR in Nov 2007. My favorite moments: went kayaking in the ocean and enjoyed a fresh mango-on-a-stick doused with lime on the beach. We endured a time share pitch from Jerry for free massages. Apparently Jerry is wise sage as well as salesman. As he tried deduce our economic status (and thus his ultimate pitch) he entertained with stories of his ski junkie years (pre-golf junkie years). As a young adult, his guiding life force was going skiing as much as humanly possible. He would go to the highest mountain point and look down viewing everything at the scale of ants. That way, any problems were put into perspective and he knew he could handle them. Well, Jerry, thanks for the ominous message cause that's basically what happened to us in Mexico. It gave us healthy perspectives on all the issues that we've been dealing with. And we're better for it. But no thanks on the timeshare.

The group of students from U of C have returned from Cuba. I can't wait to learn more about their trip and the culture there. I decided to forgo this trip in lieu of Mexico. Hope I made the right decision. I think so. *Thanks Dan!*

A few days before we departed to Mexico, Matt got a huge surprise! He was accepted as an intern at St. Petersburg General Hospital in St. Pete, FL. Starting this July he'll be in Florida for one year. The intern year is the name for the first year of residency. We're not sure if he'll stay in St. Pete all 6 years of residency. Right now he's only committed to one. I hope that this unanticipated positioning is nothing but goodness for him. He needs to meet a doc that is an understanding and outstanding mentor. I'll be remaining in Chicago finishing grad school. I graduate June 2010 so we at least know the extent of our long distance term. His brother Andy will continue to rent our house in Kansas City. What a precarious predicament! If we can just balance the books this year, we'll turn out okay.

I have some interesting painting opportunities coming up. I hope that I have been making the right decisions by accepting the right ones and foregoing others.

Today, a trip to the Green Market in Lincoln Park Nature Museum with my friend Chris was much needed. I tasted some of the best cheese since I was in France. And picked up some dense wheat bread and lamb meat. Green curry with lamb tonight! Yum! Even more than the market, the conservatory was A-Mazing. Can't wait to go back. We plan to colaborate on a book revolving around the topic of empiricism. We agreed, the conservatory is THE best place to discuss such a topic. We then enjoyed the White Elephant thrift store. Got some kick ass scarves- one with poisin ivy, not a Heremes. Then some high-design in the form Jake's in the Gold Coast. After that, Urban Outfitters was a depressing let down. "The Mc'ie D's of things you wear." We resolved, never again. I read "Society of the Spectacle" on the two and half hour (yes 2.5 roundtrip) train ride. Yuck.

Already, I am looking forward to the summer here in Chicago. Apparently people praise the summer as much as they curse the winter. So the disposition balances out. I am being exposed to so much information that it's impossible to really absorb and deal with it as much as I'd like. Therefore I can't wait to hunker down in my studio this summer for some really in-depth painting sessions.

Whoa nellie!

...and after that catharsis of questions, i am going to paint, paint, paint! Got to test my theories. 

What is this painting doing?

My exercise for today is to talk about what my painting is actually doing. Here goes:

The painting is about immediacy.

The painting emphasizes the act of painting.

The painting makes clear it's ingredients (material, method, surface, etc.)

The painting is about communicating without/before words (body language of the paint is that of the artist). Therefore I am more transparent as an artist (not nec. person) through the painting.

The painting emphasizes the author/artist hand.

The painting employs color as a viscerally communicative and atmospheric device.

The color revolves around a primary sensibility: red, green, blue, black, brown, white, etc.

The paint is obviously handled by brushes.

The paint is controlled yet the intent of control is not known to the viewer.

The painting references a landscape.

The painting format is square.

The painting reminds me of a Joan Mitchell abex painting. This pisses me off.

The painting reminds others of Cecily Brown's paintings. This pisses me off.

The painting composition is directing attention towards the middle- kinda like an x or crosshairs.

The painting looks fresh and shiny, almost wet.

The marks on the painting are predominately grouped into sections. This alludes to how the painting was made- again the body language of the artist.

Therefore, this painting is about the sensibility of the artist.

How will I disengage with myself in order to create work which engages in a larger art dialogue? (Why do I want it to be an "art dialogue"- a dialogue founded within current art sensibilities, implies subscribing and not transforming or challenging current ideological systems) How can I produce a conversation point with abstract visual language? How will I turn this natural compulsion to make and innate ability to execute two-dimensional imagery into a fundamental platform for future creativity? I think I must first neutralize the way I currently make paintings (in order to isolate my specific interest within perception and art- in order to get at the meat of making and past the surface level visual tropes I keep employing). By neutralizing, I mean obliterating the current way I use and think about color, line, mark, time, content, form, etc. I think I can achieve this by painting it out of me- a more conscious painting process that is concerned not with the image but the act that creates an image. Why is it important to me that this is not just beautiful, seductive imagery? How do I want the painting to frame a discussion? 

Right now, I perceive a disconnect between what I am reading/researching/learning and how I make the paintings. What is the relationship of content-to-form in my personal practice? How can I create a process that intertwines my process of uncovering content with the making? How can content manifest itself in abstract/non-objective visual language? Does the tension between these seemingly incompatible ingredients become the conversation of the painting?

If perception is my content of interest, how valid is it? I think that depends on the angle of perception I investigate. 

Is abstraction holding me back? Can mimetic techniques add anything constructive?  

Is abstract painting valid? Is painting valid? Is making art valid? Will it be valid in 20 years? In 1,000 years? Are these questions valid? More importantly, is my approach to these questions methodical and constructive?

Back2Basics

I'm in my first year of grad school, my first quarter of my first year. Although I attended art school for undergrad I feel like this is my first year of art school. This is the real deal. We're finally getting to the meat. I could have had more meat introduced in undergrad but I was not prepared/developed enough to grasp it in it's entirity (still am not, but oh well). I wonder if this sense of, "shit, I just figured something really fundamental out and I'm pretty old to be finally grasping fundamentals" which illuminates how many more fundamental building blocks are floating out there for me to encounter.  Anyhoo, here are some of my basic thoughts that I've been grappling with this week:

Perhaps the basis of perception is that everything we know and trust is measured with our senses. What role does intuition play? That impulse that negates and supercedes our empirical senses is a powerful, undeniable force. Our empirical senses are our equipment with which to measure and navigate the world. And art is one of the forerunners that fucks with them.

As an art viewer, do you willingly subject yourself to surrender? Do you willingly engage in order to question your empirical senses? Suspend your disbelief? How willingly do you disengage with habit and familiarity in order to engage in another form of reality and ideology? What does my work demand of you, the viewer? Is it purely rewarding? Is that enough to satisfy me? If not, exactly why?

How can a visual trope without a clear/literal allusion challenge or inform a viewer? How can marks, colors, composition, and facture reward, challenge, answer, question, stand the test of time (resonate after 50 years and not appear dated or exemplary of a specific decade?- and if it successful enough to do that, what would it look like???)? 

The million dollar question: So, if my interest is (insert interest/content/research subject here)  perception  then why painting?

What will researching the perception subject bring to the content and form of the paintings?

What kind of interweaving process of research/conceptualizing/planning and making can I develop to produce objects and situations?

What is the method in which I will pursue/research the subject?

In what way will I then approach the paintings?

In what way do I approach the relationship with those that buy my paintings?

In what way do I approach museums, galleries, or art spaces that would like to feature the work?

What role then does the research play?

What form does research take in terms of archiving?

DoA: III

Okay, here's the third installment of my definition of art:

What i love, love, love about art, why I seek it out, why I travel across continents for it's history, why I forgo things normal people would deem logical priorities... is that art is physical manifestation of ideas. Plain and simple. 

So, today I would define art as a manifestation of ideas which represents the artist/author's comprehension of historical fact, present moment, and a comment on the future in the form of physical/visual/tactile/auditory/experiential form.

The ideas I am most drawn to are those that are personal. Tiny but firm statements of notions that represent contemplation and comprehension of the gravity and possible implications of a subject. Combine that with physical (formal) tactile, visual, auditory, experiential qualities and you have something enriching. I want to be challenged. I want art to inform me and yet ask a question of me. I want art to be aware of itself but not overly aware and contrived. I want to be rewarded for my efforts of viewership. Some works do not reward as much as others- this could be based on the artist's intent or their failure. Recently, I became aware of this fact - this need or feeling of entitlement as viewer- to be rewarded for being a good viewer- this could be a bad thing. I will stop on this point for today.

DoA: II

For now, I define art as something that is artificial. If done well, it can stand the test of time to illuminate the past, present, and future. Although it is not necessarily an object, documentation does currently play a key role in posterity and communication.  It exists first in the mind of the artist then in the mind of the viewer. 

What I enjoy about art is that when I experience a piece of art, it stays with me and is later manifested consciously or unconsciously in what I make or in my daily life. Art has become both filter and a large set of ideas that I can apply to my everyday navigation of life.

OPERATION: DEFINITION OF ART

I'm starting a project. Let's call it: OPERATION: DoA.  I don't know where it will go or how it will resolve itself but I will use this blog as the platform/medium.  I am going to document how I define art.  Personally, I am fickle and my connotations of things change by the hour (soon to be by the minute).  So, I am going to periodically record my definition of art.  I hypothesize that it will change, evolve, and not end up where I began.  Also, I hope it also reveals that my mindset is expanding and loosening in my conception of what it art. 

So, I shall start simply:

Art is something that is teased into being.  It is artificial or utilizes artificial means to illuminate "that which" (- insert topic here) strikes the artist's fancy.  It is not limited to an object that one can behold.

That is all for today's DoA. Perhaps one day my DoA will be 10 pages long. Perhaps one day it will be one word.  Ultimately, it has to come from digesting lots of varied sources- first person and secondary.  It is not an excerpt from any source.  It must be in my words.