I'm not Kevin but perhaps I could explain. The background of the image you are looking at is of a popular web page called Mapquest. It includes the actual web browser (internet exploer) and as best I can it’s mapping out East Huron in Ann Arbor. I may be wrong on that because it’s cut off. The foreground of the image is a black rectangle with a lighter more purplish rectangle iside in a sort of letterbox format like you’d see on a DVD of a wide screen movie. Within the larger rectangle and overlapping the smaller rectangle are a series of white squares. The squares have blurred lower and right edges to them and where they overlap there’s no line defining their boundaries. It just forms a white mass. There’s a centralized mass of the squares that move in a springing motion from left to right and up. Toward the left/bottom of this mass it a lowercase “y” and toward the top right it a capital “Y”. I don’t know the font. Then the entire picture is tilted at a 14.97-degree angle with the corners cropped off at right angles. I hope this helped.
from first anonymous to second. I know all that I have two eyes you know. I was wishing for an explenation as to what if any he wants to acomplish with this piece. is it narritive emotional conseptual ect. so in other words your long comment did not help.
To anonymous 1, thanks for your interest. My initial intention was to create a drawing and the computer seemed like the perfect fit. This was part of an experiment I was doing by trying to capture video stills in photoshop. What ended up happening when I did this was that the video would play in photoshop just as if I was watching it through a media player but except I had the option of editing it, layering it, etc.. I couldn't save it exactly like I saw it. But when I saved it, I ended up getting these very plain drawings that sorted of acted like the props of a elementary school play after the little actors and actresses abandoned the stage due to technical difficulties.
Observation remains key, especially in this particular piece because all degrees of recognition exist in this one frame. Everything is very familiar, especially for those who are reading this. If you're reading it, you have some basic idea of what a computer interface/browser/operating system looks like. Taking these familiar components and denouncing them allows for me and any viewer to get a fresher perspective on the mundane. I don't claim that anything new is presented except the fact that all of the functional buttons, scrolls, tabs, drop down menus, etc. are no longer functional in their typical means. As a result of this "digital collage" I found a small degree of interest within a mundane process and thought I would share it. I'm more interested in what the work is doing, rather than "does it fit a preconceived idea?" I hope that helps.
"As a result of this "digital collage" I found a small degree of interest within a mundane process and thought I would share it. I'm more interested in what the work is doing, rather than "does it fit a preconceived idea?" I hope that helps."
It is appreciated that you wanted to share your investigations, but a little bit of an explanation [title? etc] would have maybe steered the viewer into the realm that you were working with, so they could then intellectually collaborate with your visual offering.
This is needed. The 3 artist who showed before you are working with a familiar format, painting, which offers a way into the next step of their visual musing [not that I cared for this work, I didnt, really, too decorative].
thank you for your belated comments. I was intrigued by your work, and wonder if there is more of this to come
For me my interest in the piece begins with trying to decipher the process that made the image. Observation definitely is key. There are so many seemingly recognizable elements; web browsers, the mapquest page, familiar font, the letterboxing format, but it never adds up to any sort of logical process for me. I want to assume that it’s a screen grab from a DVD being played on a computer, but the black square should then logically have its own window with close/minimize buttons. On top of that the white squares cross the boundaries of the letterbox. The squares look like they are animated with the blurred edges and the springing motion of the one with the Y’s in it. So I logically want to have them on what looks like a DVD screen. But the overlapping kills that theory and leaves me with something that looks logical but actually isn’t.
These are the things keep me looking at the piece. They are what sustain my attention for long periods of time. That’s when I start to notice all the wonderful things in the image: The recognition of mapquest icon from just the “M”, the connection of the indecipherable text of the mapquest page with the two Y’s, the way the white squares can become places on a map and the Y’s become a route, the proposed destination on the left side of the mapquest page leading to the “search” on the right, etc.
It’s a great image and explaining the process ruins part of what makes it so great. The only direction needed its to look. Just because it’s not a traditional artist medium doesn’t mean it’s not familiar. There’s no need for any sort of justification. It just is what it is.
"It’s a great image and explaining the process ruins part of what makes it so great. The only direction needed its to look. Just because it’s not a traditional artist medium doesn’t mean it’s not familiar. There’s no need for any sort of justification. It just is what it is."
You cant actually believe this, right?? Okay, its an vaguely intriqing pattern set on top of a screen capture of Mapquest....but Great? You must be kidding. Its okay. An experiement. A topic for conversation. But Great? What a diminishing of a word, like the overused "masterpiece"
It may have come about because of an experiment but what came out of it is vague, intriguing, and GREAT. Especially compared with the paintings posted before it.
I can look at this thing for hours on end. I wana masturbate to it. I can whole-heartedly say it's Fuckin' GREAT.
hi justed wanted to chime in, in part because my painting was vaguely dissed here (as one of the previous three 'too decorative' paintings, LOL), uh.. i applaud experimentation and appreciate explorations in non-traditional media~ however~ a lack of concept behind the work suggests to me a lack of thought put into the concept behind the work, not to suggest that KB isn't thinking, just that an experiment may be nothing more than a fetal thought yet to be born into some substantial work of art. we can all toss in our thoughts and build an experiment into something we'd like it to be i spose, and perhaps this can be of benefit to the artist in honing in on what the work is about... whoops i gotta get back to work... more later.. yours truly~ taurus burns
I wasnt dissing your work, taurus, when I said I didnt care for it becuse i felt it was decorative. It was merely a statement of my personal fact base. I also dont care for renoir, guauguin, or karin davie because thier work is 'too decorative' for my taste.
i acknoledge that you are a strong, consistent artist who shows quite often in this area, and i applaud that.
"however~ a lack of concept behind the work suggests to me a lack of thought put into the concept behind the work"
There's no clear concept behind most of the work shown on here. Besides the hair panties and some aspects of others everything seems to mostly be concerned with its formal aspects. Does this mean that they put no thought into what they were doing?
An experiment can be a substantial work of art in itself. If it turns out good then it's good, if there's interesting aspects then you learn from that, and if it's shit then you forget about it. Thought is only needed as a means of finding the next step, if there is one to be found. I find thoughtlessness to be far more interesting then a logical concept. It's just more difficult to recreate consistently.
This may be a once off thing for KB or he may take it somewhere else. Who know. But as a single image on this blog it works.
I should clarify, by comment on the paintings was more in reference to the paintings as they are on this blog. Removed documents of things that in reality would normally be viewed in a specific type of setting. All dimension, placement in a space, surrounding objects are ignored and we are left with pixels. This is fine. We all accept this and agree to imagine what the piece is really like. But with Kevin's piece I never needed to ignore the blog and there wasn't a different environment to imagine. It exists on the blog. It is the ideal venue for this piece. It started as pixels and is shown as pixels while still in a venue where it will be viewed as a piece of art. It just makes me more conscious that while I'm supposed to be looking at paintings I'm really looking at a jpg.
Gilbert Vasquez Vincent Troia Dylan Spacekeydet Andrea Rogers George Rahme Nate Morgan Rodney Kammer Chido Johnson Curtis Glenn Andre Frye Kevin Beasley Zakk Barozzini Linda Barakat John Azoni
Russell Industrial Complex, Building #3 (way in the back) 1600 Clay Avenue, Detroit
AND
THEORETLCALLY SOFT
APRIL SEGEDI VANESSA MERRILL GARY ELSON KATHERINE R CHANTELLE MOZINGO ROD KAMMER BEVERLY WOOBECK KATE KELLER STEVEN KUYPERS ELIZABETH LADD CRYSTAL LUPO CHARLENE CURTIS KATELYN RUKS AILEEN SNYDER +MERIKU+
opening Saturday April 28, 2007 7:00 - 11:00 russell industrial Complex, Bld #1 1600 Clay, DETROIT MI
It is neccessary for me to consider two things: the space that each work will exist in, and the perception- presently and historically. Yes, I do realize that this piece was created on the computer, therefore it exists only in a virtual space. It is appropriate for this forum because the firsthand experience of the work is what's important to me. Hence site-specificity (no pun intended).
to Taurus, i understand your logic but where you lose me is your doubts in the development of a concept within the work. With this particular piece, there is no idea, nothing to get, nothing to ask the artist in relationship to meaning. You are correct, there is no idea for you to get. If one is looking for questions and answers from the artist through this piece, one will find that they are not there, rather they are developed through one's own initiative. The overarching intentions rest within the acts of observation, questioning, contemplation, and the development of meaning through experience. There are many different ways that I go about making a piece but all of these processes are in the service of developing a meaning through interacting with the work, after it has been fleshed out. Personally, this work means many things to me that I am aware of, but I feel it unneccessary for anyone else to know them because it quickly turns into being about that.
For example, for someone who has never visited or experienced a place firsthand, that place means very little to them, regardless of any images they've seen, facts they know, etc. Of course this is comparative. I bet the shooting at VT means a lot to the people reading this blog, but compare that to how much it would mean if everyone who read this blog lost someone they loved, saw the shooter in the act, etc.. It would mean a lot more, mainly because of the experience and connection that was developed.
This brings me to conclude that my manner of working is a search for my aesthetics, intentions, and understanding, questioning every aspect of what I do and enjoy. To say that experimentation which is a byproduct of actions and investigations are void of extensive amounts of thought, is unfounded because these experiments are perceptual manifestations of that very involved thought. To think the entire thing completely through and still continue to create the work would be a waste of my time. I enjoy the opposite method of working which allows me to work freely within my own intuitive sensibilities. My intentions to debunk the idea of an idea is ultimately what I look forward to- artmaking that embraces the journey just as much as the destination. I only ask that the viewer enter a state of vulnerability that questions their instilled ways of experiencing.
kevinb, you have explained your desires and intentions for making this piece, and making art for that matter, very well. i hope i don't sound facetious.. i mean what i say! your final statement, appealing to viewers to "enter a state of vulnerability that questions their instilled ways of experiencing."... yeah! i think this is a great challenge to take on. i guess my question is- are you looking to get artists on this blog to question their instilled ways of experiencing, or 'everybody else'? ~much respect, taurus burns
PS- i want to respond to a couple things that were brought up in this thread.. anon's 'too decorative' comment earlier, + someone described previous paintings on here as 'mostly concerned with formal aspects'... i propose this: when the content and the form can combine to express a concept the work has a greater impact on the viewer than something that is vaguely suggesting an ambiguous or secret idea. i believe that exploration is absolutely essential to developing one's own tastes. i also believe people want to be awed. i do anyway.
i spose my point here is: experiment away, fellow creative beings, exploration is absolutely crucial to discovering one's own tastes and habits, and every once in a while crack the world over the head with a succinct, formally brilliant master-piece, be it paint or pixel. thanks for readin' love taurus
kb, another fake, why don't you follow mike smith to yale. you both need to be together to listen to yourselves. blah,blah,blah. another art star amoung us.
on second thought, you can't change anybody.. perhaps you're setting yourself up for frustration and disappointment if your aim is to change the way other people think/ perceive/ whatever. it's much more satisfying to change from within, and to let the work reflect the changes.
and about the vaguery business.. it's not so important that the viewer know exactly why s/he likes the art, liking it is enough. it is important for the artist to be aware of his impulses though, awareness leads to new layers of understanding and well adds to the joy of creation.. love taurus
To answer your previous question my audience is anyone who sees it. I don't expect to change people, that's not even my goal, but I would like to raise some questions. Its discussions like these that make this whole blog thing amazing.
To respond to your posting, I do agree with you wholeheartedly, especially when you say that changing the way people think/ percieve/whatever will lead to frustration. I think all artists have found frustration in the creation of their work as well as in the outcome, and I am definitely no exception. Like I said, I don't expect to change people.
The one thing that bugs me the most is when artists and theorists act as if the knowledge and ways of thinking that they have gained were attributes that they were born with, as if they could read out of the womb. I credit most of my knowledge to my experiences, my mentors and peers, along with my own exploration. The only reason I came to Michigan in the first place was to be an industrial designer, and it wasn't until two and a half years ago that I decided to do what I am doing now. I could completely relate to what you were saying when you stated "it's much more satisfying to change from within, and to let the work reflect the changes." I think this is a beautiful thing that young artists such as myself need to embrace in order to get anywhere. The only thing I can account for is the testing of my own sensibilities and the things I learn from it, whether a viewer decides to do the same is up to them. What I'm saying is that I'm no different than anyone else, this "us vs. them" is kind of ridiculous because I feel like some of the strongest artists are the participants. I like sports, I like money, I like food, I have bad morning breath, my shit stinks too. Anyone that is familiar with my work from a year ago could see the vast amount of change and growth in my work. If I can connect with a few people who are just as eager as I am then that's great, but that doesn't control me nor define my own self-explorations. I question my comfort zone.
There was a time when I didn't like abstraction, or even understand it-----and I remember those days. I don't act like they never existed nor do I act or feel invincible. To be honest, I don't completely understand the notions of value in the art world nor do I fully understand the ideas of preciousness. These things are imposed heavily onto our world and the funny part is, we're the ones controlling it. Mother nature rarely steps in to set us straight. If we don't educate ourselves and act on it, either for or against, then nothing happens either way. It's just a matter of choosing sides and being honest with yourself.
I have much respect for your comments and impression Taurus.
I remember when I was first looking to apply to CCS and got my catalog from portfolio day in D.C.. The first page the book opened up to was an image of you and your work with a quote. The first thing I said to myself was, " I want my hair to look just like that."
lol many years ago i saw a picture of some guy with dreads and said the same thing! you've got a great attitude about art kevinb!.. a beloved mentor once told me that an artist's attitude matters more than his talent~
for all those anoynmous posts, if you hate the work so much and say KB has no talent..... then why the hell would you care enough to post such comments. thats the point exactly. it made you talk. and you spent so much time and effort expressing your thoughts towards one individual artist. in the end your helping him become the sucsess we all know he will become. and you can thank yourself.
"No title"
34 Comments:
please explain
I'm not Kevin but perhaps I could explain. The background of the image you are looking at is of a popular web page called Mapquest. It includes the actual web browser (internet exploer) and as best I can it’s mapping out East Huron in Ann Arbor. I may be wrong on that because it’s cut off. The foreground of the image is a black rectangle with a lighter more purplish rectangle iside in a sort of letterbox format like you’d see on a DVD of a wide screen movie. Within the larger rectangle and overlapping the smaller rectangle are a series of white squares. The squares have blurred lower and right edges to them and where they overlap there’s no line defining their boundaries. It just forms a white mass. There’s a centralized mass of the squares that move in a springing motion from left to right and up. Toward the left/bottom of this mass it a lowercase “y” and toward the top right it a capital “Y”. I don’t know the font. Then the entire picture is tilted at a 14.97-degree angle with the corners cropped off at right angles. I hope this helped.
that's funny
It's not a joke?
from first anonymous to second. I know all that I have two eyes you know. I was wishing for an explenation as to what if any he wants to acomplish with this piece. is it narritive emotional conseptual ect. so in other words your long comment did not help.
well I tried.
To anonymous 1, thanks for your interest. My initial intention was to create a drawing and the computer seemed like the perfect fit. This was part of an experiment I was doing by trying to capture video stills in photoshop. What ended up happening when I did this was that the video would play in photoshop just as if I was watching it through a media player but except I had the option of editing it, layering it, etc.. I couldn't save it exactly like I saw it. But when I saved it, I ended up getting these very plain drawings that sorted of acted like the props of a elementary school play after the little actors and actresses abandoned the stage due to technical difficulties.
Observation remains key, especially in this particular piece because all degrees of recognition exist in this one frame. Everything is very familiar, especially for those who are reading this. If you're reading it, you have some basic idea of what a computer interface/browser/operating system looks like. Taking these familiar components and denouncing them allows for me and any viewer to get a fresher perspective on the mundane. I don't claim that anything new is presented except the fact that all of the functional buttons, scrolls, tabs, drop down menus, etc. are no longer functional in their typical means. As a result of this "digital collage" I found a small degree of interest within a mundane process and thought I would share it. I'm more interested in what the work is doing, rather than "does it fit a preconceived idea?" I hope that helps.
"As a result of this "digital collage" I found a small degree of interest within a mundane process and thought I would share it. I'm more interested in what the work is doing, rather than "does it fit a preconceived idea?" I hope that helps."
It is appreciated that you wanted to share your investigations, but a little bit of an explanation [title? etc] would have maybe steered the viewer into the realm that you were working with, so they could then intellectually collaborate with your visual offering.
This is needed. The 3 artist who showed before you are working with a familiar format, painting, which offers a way into the next step of their visual musing [not that I cared for this work, I didnt, really, too decorative].
thank you for your belated comments. I was intrigued by your work, and wonder if there is more of this to come
from anonymous one thanks
from anonymous two:
For me my interest in the piece begins with trying to decipher the process that made the image. Observation definitely is key. There are so many seemingly recognizable elements; web browsers, the mapquest page, familiar font, the letterboxing format, but it never adds up to any sort of logical process for me. I want to assume that it’s a screen grab from a DVD being played on a computer, but the black square should then logically have its own window with close/minimize buttons. On top of that the white squares cross the boundaries of the letterbox. The squares look like they are animated with the blurred edges and the springing motion of the one with the Y’s in it. So I logically want to have them on what looks like a DVD screen. But the overlapping kills that theory and leaves me with something that looks logical but actually isn’t.
These are the things keep me looking at the piece. They are what sustain my attention for long periods of time. That’s when I start to notice all the wonderful things in the image: The recognition of mapquest icon from just the “M”, the connection of the indecipherable text of the mapquest page with the two Y’s, the way the white squares can become places on a map and the Y’s become a route, the proposed destination on the left side of the mapquest page leading to the “search” on the right, etc.
It’s a great image and explaining the process ruins part of what makes it so great. The only direction needed its to look. Just because it’s not a traditional artist medium doesn’t mean it’s not familiar. There’s no need for any sort of justification. It just is what it is.
"It’s a great image and explaining the process ruins part of what makes it so great. The only direction needed its to look. Just because it’s not a traditional artist medium doesn’t mean it’s not familiar. There’s no need for any sort of justification. It just is what it is."
You cant actually believe this, right?? Okay, its an vaguely intriqing pattern set on top of a screen capture of Mapquest....but Great? You must be kidding. Its okay. An experiement. A topic for conversation. But Great? What a diminishing of a word, like the overused "masterpiece"
It may have come about because of an experiment but what came out of it is vague, intriguing, and GREAT. Especially compared with the paintings posted before it.
I can look at this thing for hours on end. I wana masturbate to it. I can whole-heartedly say it's Fuckin' GREAT.
you must be a truly lonley guy, anonymous. Get out into the fresh air. Meet people.
hi justed wanted to chime in, in part because my painting was vaguely dissed here (as one of the previous three 'too decorative' paintings, LOL), uh.. i applaud experimentation and appreciate explorations in non-traditional media~ however~ a lack of concept behind the work suggests to me a lack of thought put into the concept behind the work, not to suggest that KB isn't thinking, just that an experiment may be nothing more than a fetal thought yet to be born into some substantial work of art. we can all toss in our thoughts and build an experiment into something we'd like it to be i spose, and perhaps this can be of benefit to the artist in honing in on what the work is about... whoops i gotta get back to work... more later..
yours truly~
taurus burns
I wasnt dissing your work, taurus, when I said I didnt care for it becuse i felt it was decorative. It was merely a statement of my personal fact base.
I also dont care for renoir, guauguin, or karin davie because thier work is 'too decorative' for my taste.
i acknoledge that you are a strong, consistent artist who shows quite often in this area, and i applaud that.
"however~ a lack of concept behind the work suggests to me a lack of thought put into the concept behind the work"
There's no clear concept behind most of the work shown on here. Besides the hair panties and some aspects of others everything seems to mostly be concerned with its formal aspects. Does this mean that they put no thought into what they were doing?
An experiment can be a substantial work of art in itself. If it turns out good then it's good, if there's interesting aspects then you learn from that, and if it's shit then you forget about it. Thought is only needed as a means of finding the next step, if there is one to be found. I find thoughtlessness to be far more interesting then a logical concept. It's just more difficult to recreate consistently.
This may be a once off thing for KB or he may take it somewhere else. Who know. But as a single image on this blog it works.
I should clarify, by comment on the paintings was more in reference to the paintings as they are on this blog. Removed documents of things that in reality would normally be viewed in a specific type of setting. All dimension, placement in a space, surrounding objects are ignored and we are left with pixels. This is fine. We all accept this and agree to imagine what the piece is really like. But with Kevin's piece I never needed to ignore the blog and there wasn't a different environment to imagine. It exists on the blog. It is the ideal venue for this piece. It started as pixels and is shown as pixels while still in a venue where it will be viewed as a piece of art. It just makes me more conscious that while I'm supposed to be looking at paintings I'm really looking at a jpg.
perhaps 'vaguely dismissed' is more accurate than 'vaguely dissed',in response to the work being "too decorative".
~love taurus burns
_________ and ________
Saturday April 28th
Opening 7-10pm
Sunday April 29th
BBQ 1-4pm
Gilbert Vasquez
Vincent Troia
Dylan Spacekeydet
Andrea Rogers
George Rahme
Nate Morgan
Rodney Kammer
Chido Johnson
Curtis Glenn
Andre Frye
Kevin Beasley
Zakk Barozzini
Linda Barakat
John Azoni
Russell Industrial Complex, Building #3 (way in the back)
1600 Clay Avenue, Detroit
AND
THEORETLCALLY SOFT
APRIL SEGEDI
VANESSA MERRILL
GARY ELSON
KATHERINE R
CHANTELLE MOZINGO
ROD KAMMER
BEVERLY WOOBECK
KATE KELLER
STEVEN KUYPERS
ELIZABETH LADD
CRYSTAL LUPO
CHARLENE CURTIS
KATELYN RUKS
AILEEN SNYDER
+MERIKU+
opening
Saturday April 28, 2007
7:00 - 11:00
russell industrial
Complex, Bld #1 1600 Clay,
DETROIT MI
It is neccessary for me to consider two things: the space that each work will exist in, and the perception- presently and historically. Yes, I do realize that this piece was created on the computer, therefore it exists only in a virtual space. It is appropriate for this forum because the firsthand experience of the work is what's important to me. Hence site-specificity (no pun intended).
to Taurus, i understand your logic but where you lose me is your doubts in the development of a concept within the work. With this particular piece, there is no idea, nothing to get, nothing to ask the artist in relationship to meaning. You are correct, there is no idea for you to get. If one is looking for questions and answers from the artist through this piece, one will find that they are not there, rather they are developed through one's own initiative. The overarching intentions rest within the acts of observation, questioning, contemplation, and the development of meaning through experience. There are many different ways that I go about making a piece but all of these processes are in the service of developing a meaning through interacting with the work, after it has been fleshed out. Personally, this work means many things to me that I am aware of, but I feel it unneccessary for anyone else to know them because it quickly turns into being about that.
For example, for someone who has never visited or experienced a place firsthand, that place means very little to them, regardless of any images they've seen, facts they know, etc. Of course this is comparative. I bet the shooting at VT means a lot to the people reading this blog, but compare that to how much it would mean if everyone who read this blog lost someone they loved, saw the shooter in the act, etc.. It would mean a lot more, mainly because of the experience and connection that was developed.
This brings me to conclude that my manner of working is a search for my aesthetics, intentions, and understanding, questioning every aspect of what I do and enjoy. To say that experimentation which is a byproduct of actions and investigations are void of extensive amounts of thought, is unfounded because these experiments are perceptual manifestations of that very involved thought. To think the entire thing completely through and still continue to create the work would be a waste of my time. I enjoy the opposite method of working which allows me to work freely within my own intuitive sensibilities. My intentions to debunk the idea of an idea is ultimately what I look forward to- artmaking that embraces the journey just as much as the destination. I only ask that the viewer enter a state of vulnerability that questions their instilled ways of experiencing.
yeah. ;)
kevinb, you have explained your desires and intentions for making this piece, and making art for that matter, very well. i hope i don't sound facetious.. i mean what i say! your final statement, appealing to viewers to "enter a state of vulnerability that questions their instilled ways of experiencing."... yeah! i think this is a great challenge to take on. i guess my question is- are you looking to get artists on this blog to question their instilled ways of experiencing, or 'everybody else'?
~much respect, taurus burns
PS- i want to respond to a couple things that were brought up in this thread.. anon's 'too decorative' comment earlier, + someone described previous paintings on here as 'mostly concerned with formal aspects'...
i propose this: when the content and the form can combine to express a concept the work has a greater impact on the viewer than something that is vaguely suggesting an ambiguous or secret idea. i believe that exploration is absolutely essential to developing one's own tastes. i also believe people want to be awed. i do anyway.
i spose my point here is: experiment away, fellow creative beings, exploration is absolutely crucial to discovering one's own tastes and habits, and every once in a while crack the world over the head with a succinct, formally brilliant master-piece, be it paint or pixel.
thanks for readin' love taurus
I'm awed by things that are vaguely suggesting.
kb,
another fake, why don't you follow mike smith to yale. you both need to be together to listen to yourselves. blah,blah,blah. another art star amoung us.
on second thought, you can't change anybody.. perhaps you're setting yourself up for frustration and disappointment if your aim is to change the way other people think/ perceive/ whatever. it's much more satisfying to change from within, and to let the work reflect the changes.
and about the vaguery business.. it's not so important that the viewer know exactly why s/he likes the art, liking it is enough. it is important for the artist to be aware of his impulses though, awareness leads to new layers of understanding and well adds to the joy of creation..
love taurus
To answer your previous question my audience is anyone who sees it. I don't expect to change people, that's not even my goal, but I would like to raise some questions. Its discussions like these that make this whole blog thing amazing.
To respond to your posting, I do agree with you wholeheartedly, especially when you say that changing the way people think/ percieve/whatever will lead to frustration. I think all artists have found frustration in the creation of their work as well as in the outcome, and I am definitely no exception. Like I said, I don't expect to change people.
The one thing that bugs me the most is when artists and theorists act as if the knowledge and ways of thinking that they have gained were attributes that they were born with, as if they could read out of the womb. I credit most of my knowledge to my experiences, my mentors and peers, along with my own exploration. The only reason I came to Michigan in the first place was to be an industrial designer, and it wasn't until two and a half years ago that I decided to do what I am doing now. I could completely relate to what you were saying when you stated "it's much more satisfying to change from within, and to let the work reflect the changes." I think this is a beautiful thing that young artists such as myself need to embrace in order to get anywhere. The only thing I can account for is the testing of my own sensibilities and the things I learn from it, whether a viewer decides to do the same is up to them. What I'm saying is that I'm no different than anyone else, this "us vs. them" is kind of ridiculous because I feel like some of the strongest artists are the participants. I like sports, I like money, I like food, I have bad morning breath, my shit stinks too. Anyone that is familiar with my work from a year ago could see the vast amount of change and growth in my work. If I can connect with a few people who are just as eager as I am then that's great, but that doesn't control me nor define my own self-explorations. I question my comfort zone.
There was a time when I didn't like abstraction, or even understand it-----and I remember those days. I don't act like they never existed nor do I act or feel invincible. To be honest, I don't completely understand the notions of value in the art world nor do I fully understand the ideas of preciousness. These things are imposed heavily onto our world and the funny part is, we're the ones controlling it. Mother nature rarely steps in to set us straight. If we don't educate ourselves and act on it, either for or against, then nothing happens either way. It's just a matter of choosing sides and being honest with yourself.
I have much respect for your comments and impression Taurus.
I remember when I was first looking to apply to CCS and got my catalog from portfolio day in D.C.. The first page the book opened up to was an image of you and your work with a quote. The first thing I said to myself was, " I want my hair to look just like that."
And to the anonymous, who's Mike Smith?
lol many years ago i saw a picture of some guy with dreads and said the same thing!
you've got a great attitude about art kevinb!.. a beloved mentor once told me that an artist's attitude matters more than his talent~
~taurusb
are you guys done jacking each other off yet?
I'm totally sincere when I say this:
That's really cute!
i love that there are as many lovers as there are haters in detroit :I
yin yaNG ALang ding dang
this has been a really good constructive bunch of posts for the most part.
Now lets get back to the petty shit talking that defines the blog's comment section.
word up, i hate art, it all sucks, artists suck,
you're either a sell out or a hack
I'm dustin :)
for all those anoynmous posts, if you hate the work so much and say KB has no talent..... then why the hell would you care enough to post such comments. thats the point exactly. it made you talk. and you spent so much time and effort expressing your thoughts towards one individual artist. in the end your helping him become the sucsess we all know he will become. and you can thank yourself.
porno [url=http://pornushi.ru/english-version/extrem-sex/site-931.html]best indian online shopping for womans clothes[/url]
Post a Comment
<< Home