finally.

My choice to go a lot larger in size was the main risk of the piece all the way up until I had to hang it on the wall for critique. I am however extremely glad that I did go bigger and next time would want to go even further and see just how big I can go. I guess the shapes of the swatches of trash were the safest decision I made, but I saw this piece as a working idea that isn't necessarily a complete thought yet.

My materials were once again garbage, but this time I felt as though i branched out a bit more with them. Yes, I did use a lot of newspaper but that is because I tended to find newspaper scattered around more than any other piece of junk. I did see a weave or two in the gutter but thankfully chose my paper over them. I also used: egg cartons, rubber mat, plastic cracker container, metal chicken wire and thrown away fabric. I did thankfully show the qualities of each of the unique materials by simply leaving them as is, while I chose to paint over much of the found newspaper. As I learned with the last piece I did, bigger is better. I didn't really feel as though I got my idea out with the last piece since the scale was just far too small. I think my idea can only go stronger the bigger I go.

I would describe my approach to this project as: messy, picky, mechanical, and delicate. It perfectly defines my thought process, the actual process of making this piece as well as the final product, or so I believe. I think the speed at which this was made definitely holds a lot of the content. It is pretty clear to most people that I wasn't able to simply just make this whole thing up in a matter of hours. I think my approach of measuring, cutting, painting, repainting and then finally pinning each piece together is what draws viewers in and wonder what exactly is going on and how is this thing staying together?? My work is extremely personal. Almost every aspect of it is made by hand and could never quite be recreated in the same way. 

I think the artist that inspired me the most for these pieces was El Anatsui. He got me to think out of the box when it comes to my materials. I definitely stole his style of using trash to create art as well as beautifying it...although we both approach it slightly differently. I guess my work also refers to art in the last 40 years because of its semi political reference to our wastefulness as humans and possibly installation art. The current events that inspired me to do these works was the fact that trash literally is EVERYWHERE even when our country is spending millions on green campaigns to put an end to it. I guess what makes my project relevant is the fact that I  wanted it to be. I'm actually still quite shocked that no one in class tried to argue against my work being an actual painting, but maybe they were just too afraid to. 

painterNYC

Considering the fact that Elizabeth Peyton ended up being the ONLY painter that showed up on this blog out of my list, I will once again write about her work...

Critique#1: "This painting has an economy of brushwork and simplicity of composition that belies the workings of a fevered imagination and a startling bejeweled intelligence." 

Critique#2: "Are these last two what happens if you try to paint a face like a mondrian (the dumas being his late watercolors)? Compare mondrian's reptetiveness to the these last two." 

Neither criticisms (out of the 60 or so unintelligent/unintelligible ones I skipped) seem to comment at all on her simple subject matter of portraiture but instead seem to ask more of the artist when it comes to rendering real life and perhaps finding her own voice in the realm of art. Although I do find Peyton's work thoughtful and appealing at times, I have to agree with both bloggers on some issues. Sure, the artist does have a certain style to her but does that mean she needs to stay so one dimensional? I understand that this is the way she wishes to paint but after a while I feel myself getting bored. I just can't seem to connect with the figure or find any sense of a human in her and therefore lose interest with the lifeless creature. As forthe second blogger who believed that Peyton was ripping on Mondrian, I actually researched what his portraits looked like and didn't really see a similarity. 

I'd be a liar if I said I couldn't say similar criticisms about my work, so I guess I will give it to you straight. My last piece literally was just your basic average portrait of a celebrity, pretty similar to the likes of Peyton's above. Yeah it's nice and it looks like the star but, so what? Frankly, I got real bored real fast making my last painting and it's due to the same reason I got bored with Peyton's work: disconnect. The reason behind liking and not liking a piece of art usually revolves around whether or not the work speaks to the individual and evokes an emotion from them. How can one get something out of a blank dead stare? Thankfully, I learned a great deal from the last painting and realized that the subject matter wasn't exactly something I could develop much further and needed to move on. BUT, if I hadn't made that extremely smart choice I think I would have possibly tried to find a way for the viewer to connect with my subject better. Especially for those who don't exactly know anything about Lindsay Lohan the connection was probably even more of a strain to make. To do so, I could have possibly incorporated various photos of her as a child and before she got hooked to cocaine so that they could see the downward spiral. But, maybe the subject was just a one liner after all and I am glad I am going to keep it that way. 

matchy matchy.

Out of the five artists I researched below, I believe that both Elizabeth Peyton and Andy Warhol seem to get my drift the most when it comes to my previous painting. Here's why...

Elizabeth Peyton:

Not only do we have similar color schemes with bright in-your-face primaries but it seems we both can't help but be absolutely fascinated with the fabulous and also treacherous lives of young celebrities. Although my works of art may bring to life the darker side of things, I think we both realize that no matter if we glorify or condemn these starlets for their actions, they are still everywhere you turn and impossible not to talk about. If there is one thing I can take from looking at Peyton's work it is her lack of fear when it comes to applying paint and color. Take for example my Lindsay Lohan painting, although I was so obviously critiquing the star her for her drug habits, I could have enhanced this even more if I was more free with the baking soda and paint perhaps. 

Andy Warhol:

Much like with Peyton, I believe that Warhol and I hold some of the same interests when it comes to subject matter for art. I am constantly observing and analyzing things that I see in daily life and wonder how it all came to be. While I may have specifically wanted to discuss the "celebrity" in my last work, like Andy, I too find simple pleasures in the small things. I think that although my inspiration and fascination with fame and the celebrity has come to an end artistically for me, I believe that Andy is still present in my current work involving garbage. He made daily objects iconic and beautiful before anyone saw them in such a way, I too am taking the trash we see around us and turning it into something one wouldn't expect necessarily. 

me VS. them

Andy Warhol.

A household name today, Warhol thought outside of the box, pushed the boundaries and buttons of the art world while still finding time to hit it big during the 1960's. With a subject matter too bold yet simple to ignore, Warhol held up a mirror to America and told it just the way he saw it whether it be through painting, printmaking or even film. As a Triple-Threat, he commented on consumerism, fame and daily life in eye-catching graphic colors and high contrast black and white.
Johannes Kahrs.

Metamorphosis should be Kahrs middle name. Beginning each work of art with a simple photograph or image, he slowly but surely transforms, detaches and blurs the original copy until his final piece of work is a new entity entirely. By altering the actual reality (whether it be something as simple as shade or tone) of each of his images, the artist seems to cheekily critique the likes of both politics and film. 

Luc Tuymans.

Hailing from Belgium, Tuymans is best known for his figurative paintings that disect and transform other medias such as film and television. Although the artist's palette tends to stay with the muted neutral shades of white and gray, this doesn't take away any of the intrigue the work may create for the viewer. In fact, because of the lack of color it seems to force one to think and look deeper into the painting and focus in on the inner workings of the piece. 

Elizabeth Peyton.

Resembling a washy and drippy version of fashion illustration, Peyton primarily depicts celebrities in a stylized and almost androgynous way. Her choice of bright and vivid colors really seem to place the figures in an untouchable realm, much like the glamorous lives of her subjects. Although it never did specify why in fact she chooses her subject matter, I can only assume it is to comment on the deified aspect of stardom.

Karen Kilimnik.

Inspired by pop culture of the 1960's as well as the works of the Old Masters, Kilimnik's paintings ooze wit and humor within the splashes of color. Taking reference from  kitschy television shows, fashion and art history her work is described often as using a "scatter" technique which can is best defined as something along the lines of assemblage or collage. 

conflicts & resolutions.

gettin my act together.

Thank you Tim Noble & Sue Webster, your collaborations in garbage blow my mind. As with most great ideas, I wish I could've thought this one up... but I guess I will let it slide just this once. I would've liked to have done something similar to their work but it felt too unoriginal and/or my finished project would probably be lackluster in comparison. In the end, this basically just helped me settle down with a subject matter I felt had room for exploration. 

The caption for this photo could be nothing other than: El Anatsui is a badass. 

I love how his work entitled "The Crumbling Wall" is intimidating yet somehow warmly inviting, strong yet  clearly falling to pieces and still both rough and soft. I have always been fascinated with dichotomies and although most of the time when I have seen these "beautiful disasters" I reply with a yawn, but this guy really has it down. He was and is the main inspiration behind my work this semester because I want to be comfortable with both creation and destruction. 
Oh, Stevie Nicks. If you only knew the hours spent in my room trying to mimic that rasp of yours.... I digress. Jason Mecier may be slightly too literal when choosing "celebrity trash" as his main focus but hey, kitsch is in right? As I said in class, I have been looking for a way to show more humor in my art and after stumbling across this piece I knew I had to go for it. Fame is also another topic that has completely fascinated me throughout the years and especially because it is something our society feeds on like a pack of malnourished piranhas. We glamorize these celebrities to the point where we believe they are gods and goddesses and punish them with a little slap on the wrist as long as they are still on the "A-List". Yet once bumped from the top of the food chain,  these stars get set out on the curb next to last night's beer cans. 
Sugar and spice & everything nice.

Comenius Rothlisberger's tongue in cheek attitude on drugs and the world of art/fashion is exactly what I want to accomplish with my disposable child star paintings. I would love to try and actually make an entire painting out of a similar concoction (he uses cocaine and sugar) just for the hell of it.