So, still feeling frustrated, but persevering. During the first meeting with my mentor, she alluded to not being so "precious" in approaching a painting. Good advice, but hard to take nevertheless. I've been painting for years now, and it is really quite difficult to not think about presenting a finished canvas. I like to think of myself as a
reasonably humble, fairly self-aware individual...but really wanting to make paintings that are "good" -- really wanting to please -- is a heavy shackle to bring into the studio. On a morning walk, I talked to Dave about how I don't really know "what" it is that I want to paint anymore. He had such a wonderful response -- that my approach is intuitive, so the most important thing is getting past my avoidance and just mess around. Eventually something will happen. It's challenging as a self-critical person to read articles about abstract expressionism that say it's become such a familiar idiom that it's been reduced to random doodling... well, here's the quote I'm thinking of:
"abstract expressionism is now so embedded in our culture—accepted as a kind of brand name—that new work too often reflects our complacency with the style; the visions are bland, sloppy, or ill-conceived, aspiring to little more than unfocused doodling (à la early Cy Twombly) or, worse, inoffensive mélanges of color that corporations buy for their lobbies" (Shuster, Robert, "
Virginia Martinsen's 'Face on Mars' at ATM Gallery", The Village Voice, Tuesday, October 6th 2009, ). Yikes! What's a confused MFA student / AbEx painter to do?
I've been thinking about space alot while reading Briony Fer's
On Abstract Art. I've been encouraged to think about creating traditional space through color (warm/cool; light/dark; small/large) -- traditional means of creating illusionistic space. What if that's not what I'm interested in? I'm not very far along in reading Fer's book, but I am fascinated with the first chapter where she discusses Malevich (and other artists) and collage -- characterizing his work in part as a "reworking of collage in the idiom of painting"; and collage as breach in representation rather than a step or building block to abstraction. She also talks about Malevich's seriality ("an act of originality endlessly repeated") and how this repetition imagined as originality (the contradiction within this) is "constantly repressed within modernism". Perhaps more interesting are her explorations of how Malevich/Suprematism addressed issues of representation. She discusses "the ways in which method was revealed in the picture to who that representation in art is only one of the ways, one among the materials available." Related to this is a discussion of fantasy, the role of the spectator in the creation of this fantasy, and the question, "what space of fantasy can there be in these pictures?". More later; I just got called to dinner :-)
As an aside, I'm also reading a cool little book, "John Currin Selects" that I picked up for $8 at a used book store. I love his unapologetic embrace of the idea of the masterpiece and of the figurative. There's some point where you just really have to declare what you love. Regardless of whether a style is worn out, over done/done before, there's really something that keeps people painting and loving the image. I look at my 6 year old and it's such an innate impulse to make sense of the world through depiction and interpretation (perhaps even cataloging). Some of us just keep wanting to interpret and express in this particular way.
So, here are my attempts to let go of preciousness (back in July, high on the residency, I stretched and primed a whole slew of large canvases on which to expend my efforts and be an "A" student). I've put them aside for now.
I had fun and enjoyed my day painting today (still using the Fagan color wheel, and I've enrolled in a color-theory boot camp class next weekend). Since I'm supposed to be keeping a "journal", painting today was done to Bob Dylan, BB King, Bonnie Raitt, and slack key guitar.
Jill, your writing is very refreshing. I have felt the same way! I am such a perfectionist and I always want to make"good" art. The thing that AIB taught me while we were there was "good" is relative and undefinable. Like the conversation the faculty had on taste. I think it comes down to what you personally value. All people won't like my art - it's impossible and looking at every kind of art and media that has been embraced in the current times - there is no "right" or "good." I think the advice of "messing around" was the best!! When I look at the work I have made this semester I know it is not technically top notch, BUT I'm now approaching a time when I would like to return to more traditional drawing and I know that what I make will be 10430983093498 times better than what I did before because I've allowed myself a bit of freedom :)
ReplyDeleteSo just have a good time - this school thing is just for you anyway right? It's yours, so don't be afraid to make it yours and do whatever. :)You're doing a great job! I wish you all the best in your art-making.
I agree with Rachel! Dammit! Also, I think your latest images really do create some great spaces. I see that you are supposed to look at Amy Sillman's stuff, yah? I did my last paper on her and Janet Fish and Sillman's most recent stuff is so so interesting space-wise. I also got a bunch of really good interviews with her that I found if you are interested in the links, one is even a sound file with her talking. BTW, I think a bunch of us are having um... art identity crisises (sp?). I know I am. Sigh.. The curse of the first semester, perhaps? I think the general consensus is to keep on keeping on until something makes sense. It's hard to balance the intellectual thinking with the art making, no? I've been bad about reading everyone's blogs, but really relate to what you're going through. MFA Solidarity! Woot!
ReplyDeleteRachel, Thank you for the encouragement. I'm also enjoying reading your blog. I really liked your love letter to drawing :-)
ReplyDeleteTwicksie (aka Sally, right? Just want to make sure), I would LOVE to get links to the sources you used for your paper. I admire Sillman and Fish. Although their work is quite different, I can also see the threads that link them, especially in use of color and geometry.
Yup -- crises left and right ;-) I heard back from Laurel about my particular manifestation and she assured me it is quite normal.