The Rejuvenator
Here is a painting that was fun to do. Everyone is changing over their blog accounts. I'm too lazy but they look cool. OK, BYE.
posted by poppy at
4:02 PM
Friday, December 22, 2006
Here is a painting that was fun to do. Everyone is changing over their blog accounts. I'm too lazy but they look cool. OK, BYE.
Previous Posts
- these eyes
- some accident victims
- a painting of robots blowing up some cars war of t...
- in a one horse open sleigh
- I will now upload my first image
- how does this work
Subscribe to
Comments [Atom]
15 Comments:
this older or newer than the last? I'm puzzled by this one's relation to 80s neo expressionism
this is actually newer than last one,..
last one done probably year and half ago or more...which of course there were alot more than just the one...
like this there are gettin to be many in this manner now..
http://www.nyfa.org/opp_detail.asp?type=Job&id=94&fid=1&sid=54&oppid=13565
who were you looking at at the time this was made?
wassily kandinsky,
why?
thats dangerous territory bro..this show has some kandinsky type new school shit but unfortunately the pics arent online
http://www.johnconnellypresents.com/i
I tried to go to that link but couldn't.
Let me know if and when it works.
I'm wondering why you think being influenced by kandinsky is dangerous territory or what it is about using him as an influence or inspiration? I'm unaware of a kandinsky new school, but I'm curious about it. Let me know what you think the challenges are but I will say that I'm up for any of it.
I'll give you my opinion, in a badly thought-out synopsis..........anything is legit of course,,,,BUt I think K is dangerous to gain influence from for the reason that it can date you very easily,which isnt really a problem I see here though (I find this one obliquely referncing 80s expressionism in an offhand, somewhat loosely unconsidered way, which puzzles me for a 2000s painter).. K, on the other hand, influenced painters the world over in a huge way starting from the 20s;eventually, his shit got out of fashion, cause it just got played out and overdone, with the original impulses behind his movement falling to the wayside.... and now I see some hip ways of picking up on his language, though the distance used by the painters I see doing it is extremely complex, and possibly fraught with moral quandries.the last connely show had a painting like the one I described, but I cant find anything online.
http://www.johnconnellypresents.com/past.htm#
thanks for taking the time to give me feedback and express your concerns. I feel any thoughtful criticism is positive. I do think that most painting being done now is a type of derivative from the past, picking up sometimes only slightly on the impulses behind the original movements.. I don't feel this is a completely bad thing. I'm wondering what you might define as a 2000's painter, not that is can be summed up neatly, but what do you feel one must engage with in a conceptual way when tapping into paintings history etc..- to not be dated.. Obviously I have an idea of your answers, and the choices I've been making are concious ones, but I'm curious all the same.
i think it can be relevant to understand the specific motivations for a style of art. Obviously enough, you did not invent the style shown here (not meant as an insult), so by inhabiting it, either consciously or not, you immediately step into a dialogue with previous practices from which it derives. one advantage of having a 2000s viewpoint is that we can be in a position of trying to discern the motivations behind the actions of our hand/;ie,gut feeling.. of course if one's creative impulses are honest enough a rejection of this is valid as well
hindsight is what i thought you meant,..
and since we have it, theres the matter of choosing to engage with it. I am at a point where i don't feel it is necassary to engage with the past, even though you acknowledge it, to be considered relevant. At the same time, I want my the choices i make to be clear cut in my mind and read that way...by 'engaging with the past' i mean answering or acknowledging the expected academic questions... I seem to have a real problem with this..To top this off, painting for me would be no fun if i was ignorant to it..
painting for me would be no fun if i was ignorant to it..
kinda confused by that..its tons of fun when you dont know shit
cooky
i mean the history,....i like knowing it..
and yeah,..it is great when you don't know how to do stuff,...it really completely is why i do it..
curious who were u looking at the one below? - have you read Concerning the Spiritual in Art?
its hard to say i was looking at anyone specific, you just get use to working or exploring with paint in a certain way... i know that it resembles certain artists all the same..
never read that,..It might be interesting, but i'm not personally concerned with any actual spirituality in my painting,... maybe the facade, but thats as far as it goes..
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home