Intellectual Review

I have been working, somewhat sluggishly, at developing myself more as an artist these days.  The entire Autumn was dedicated to first figuring out what kind of art I am going to make now that I have returned to the USA and then pushing that concept into a body of work.  In this regard things are going well.  I decided upon taking a class at the local art school to get some expert advice and take advantage of working at a studio instead my flat.  The expert advice came in the form of a discussion with my teacher, Kevin Archer and then I followed it up with a phone conversation with my friend and artist Charlie Kerns, or Beijing Charlie as he goes by  when he was traveling in China where we met.  They made two similar suggestions, one was to write about art that I like so that I can zero in more clearly on what interests me and then make art around those things.  Make what I like my own.  The second was to read art critiques from well known magazines and analyze the writing of the article and then write about my own art in the same way.  I have also made an active effort at making connections between ideas and I saw these two suggestions as a creative thinking tool as well.  So what follows below is a diary entry of my exercise of the first idea and then a short auto-critique of my own work.

Anish Kapoor
I first got a close up view of Anish Kapoor's work in Seoul although at that point I didn't really know much about him.  I just felt the trick of the eye that he was playing with were pretty neat, interesting, entertaining.  The way there was the appearance of a swirling vortex disappearing into the wall or the floor brought a smile to my face and led to many "How did he do that" moments.  In Beijing I got a much closer look.  There was one very large piece installed in the main room of Galeria Continua; that piece - Very Yes!

The entire art was constructed of mist and air.  Nothing more than a column of fog from ceiling to floor; how stunning.  I have the same appreciation for this piece as I do for something of James Turrell's  The art itself plays with the necessity of needing a thing to make art.  In these cases it is like music.  It only exists in a dynamic state.

Here my mind takes a step on its own (the creative thinking bit).  When we look at great art 'in the flesh' we normally stand in front of it for a few moments and more often than not it comes after seeing hundreds of other great works of art.  The moment we spend with it is fleeting.  The work of James Turrell and this of Anish Kapoor's highights this fact in a more direct way.  The memory we have of seeing something iconic  as Starry Night remains only a mental function.  This work of Kapoor's is vision in and of itself.  This is the strong attraction for me.
This is also why I like traditional Chinese and Japanese painting so much.  There is a delicacy that is almost ready to disappear before the eyes.  This is connected to my desire not to make more stuff.  I am very discerning about what I will hang on my wall.  When I make work I prefer to display it online or in a gallery space so that one can experience it for just a short moment.

But back to Kapoor.  I should read an interview to understand better why he makes work (the following quotes are from Kapoor during a BBC interview).

"A good work has the potential to promote a whole series of meanings, none of which are exclusive".

"The job of an artist is to excavate meaning, not to deliver it."

And her is a thought for the reader to put together - Anish Kapoor, James Turell and Yoko Ono - ephemeral and impermanence.

Auto-Critique
This work was created as the final to a series of four that were executed by myself and guided through the process by Kevin Archer, an Atlanta-based artist teaching at SCAD.  The work reflects an extension of imagery that I have been working with in one way or another for the past three years.  However, this series in particular serves the most effective summarization of the multitude of influences that may on the surface seem contradictory but are united by narrative and experience.  Similar to images one finds in Japanese comics or Chinese landscape paintings, the eye of an octopus gazes directly at the viewer and a tentacle hovers along the upper edge of the painting, lazily reaching across the surface with a mild, menacing intent.  Along the left hand side of the painting are three Asian-rendered trees which are a product of my years studying traditional Chinese painting and modeled after the three pines outside my flat.  The work is simultaneously open and closed; there is little depth and in the one space where to painting surface opens the viewer is halted by the large eye of the octopus in the receding space.  Despite this closed space, the large, black semi-sphere acts as the punctum to where the viewer enters the painting.

As I mentioned earlier this work is about narrative, like all of my art over the past year.  I am expressing journeys I have taken, things I have learned and my shyness when asked to expose myself.  I am a cautious person by nature and do not like to talk about myself unless I am sure of it or exploring some new possibility.   From my life as an epistemology teacher I have become uncertain about everything, so talking about myself deeply rarely happens.  But the eye is pleading to be noticed, much like myself, and wants to be noticed in a sincere fashion.  I am aware I am not an abnormality, although my personality type may be less typical, this work speaks to that aspect of everyone who is like myself.  We recognize the shyness and the desire to be noticed, and also the desire not to be arrogant.  The work is small which also requires participation on the viewer to approach and engage with it.  The other works in this series are less like this, they are open and fluctuate in their perspective.  They reveal other aspects of myself, in a more bold or symbolic fashion.  Throughout all these works the viewer is invited to share my experiences but also asked to share theirs as well.