And, I might add, without mentioning specifics. Unfortunately I did not tape the convo, but no matter.
I had a studio visit today with a woman who used to be the curator for the Skirball Museum. She's conducting a class in conjunction with a George Segal piece recently acquired by the museum. Because of the nature of this piece, the class will be focusing on artists and their processes. The class will be visiting different artists' studios and she has included me in the schedule later this spring.
She stopped by this morning for an initial meeting and although I cleaned up a little, I pretty much just showed her what's been going on in the studio the last few months. I'm always surprised at myself when I make sense, get to the point, and don't drag in messy details that are directly responsible for the work. It was also the first time anyone has seen the work in the studio since late last summer-the new direction, if you will. I showed them along with some of the earlier new works and talked about the relevance. I talked about scale and gesture, time and space, specificity and abstraction, control versus lack thereof, and linear narratives. I'm writing this down here so I can remember it. It was a good visit.
So although I have yet to write an updated statement for the work, I discovered I have internalized it to the point where I can speak about it with some sort of distance. It's been a year, after all. The paintings have become some sort of residue. This pleases me.
I felt better after the studio visit. She noticed last month's moribund floral arrangement sitting on my painting table, along with yesterday's fresh buttercups, and commented that I work from life. If you looked at the paintings, you'd be hard-pressed to identify the flowers as coming from real life. I explained that it was more about the concept of setting up flowers in the studio as a marking of time rather than the actual need to paint from them verbatim, though I do try for some sort of accuracy in the beginning. I mentioned the garden club calendars.
I've been feeling disconnected from the seemingly important and uber hipness of the art world here in L.A. or anywhere for that matter. There's so much hype for the trendy and popular, the gimmicks and the one-liners. It seems I am better when I forget about how, when, or why my work does, or does not fit in, and just focus on the work. It's nice to have the work appreciated for what it is, rather than dismissed for what it is not.
3 comments:
that studio visit sounds great.
looking forward to what the outcome is.
everyone focuses on their work, don't they? ...we all work hard and make good work, right?
however, i may spend too much time researching projects. and i forgot some good advice i heard, which was to focus on your own work, not the work of others.
i sometimes feel that writing out a proposal forces us to create the "hook" for the work.
a gimmick, if you will.
belief in one over the other is the conundrum...or not?
what do you think is gimmicky and trendy right now in la? can you give examples without revealing names?
i am interested - having lived here perhaps i am "too close" now.
I wasn't targeting anyone specific when I said gimmicks or one-liners. It was more a simpatico repsonse to the Times article by Roberta Smith:
"...But regardless of what you think about these artists individually, their shows share a visual austerity and coolness of temperature that are dispiritingly one-note. After encountering so many bare walls and open spaces, after examining so many amalgams of photography, altered objects, seductive materials and Conceptual puzzles awaiting deciphering, I started to feel as if it were all part of a big-box chain featuring only one brand."
"...What’s missing is art that seems made by one person out of intense personal necessity, often by hand. A lot but not all of this kind of work is painting, which seems to be becoming the art medium that dare not speak its name where museums are concerned."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/arts/design/14curators.html?pagewanted=1
I'm just really, REALLY into painting right now and that article made me feel connected.
oh absolutely.
i read that, too recently and it has stuck with me and many others.
i am going through a stage to retrace/revisit my conceptual roots and connect it with the later love of painting...i think it is working out ok.
i agree with the article, even though i find myself exploring conceptual practice out of my personal necessity. i have to get it out or i will pop.
what is ironic is that after a week or two dealing with parts i find myself dying for the random control of painting and all of the seduction it brings.
i have yet to see seductive conceptual art.
Post a Comment