Does Popularization necessarily entail simplification?

Does Popularization necessarily entail simplification? I automatically think about Pop Art and minimalism. Pop art is instantly recognizable because of its simplification of the image as well as the innovations and adaptations. Bright colors like pink, red and yellow contrasted with darker colors. The images became increasingly standardized and process of drawings are simplifying. We see an enormous range of decorative styles, shapes, and sizes in the images. Simple iconic representation visual images have been created in Pop Art. I don’t think the standardization has been diminished the creative impulse but it did establish a whole different language/communication in the visual world.

To address the question, I don’t think that popularization necessarily entails simplifications. It makes sense that it could because of our mass production culture. However, in the eastern Asian traditional paintings or calligraphy is characterized/composes of just a number of strokes. Meaning the complexity is on the progress of setting the paintbrush under the emotional control but the results are very simple. On the other hand, western artist would firstly focus on the structure of the matter and re-work the image a lot. The eastern painters are neither concerned about the appearance of a matter nor express their desire of matter ideally. Of course I am referring to the traditional method.

My understanding of the simplifications is obviously the visual aspect of the image. We as in Western culture applies that if the image is simple, maybe graphic, it becomes very attractive and easy to recognize and therefore very popular. I believe that there are a lot of images that are simple but the ideas are be very complex and it not really related to the popular.

For whose benefit is a work 'popularized"?

I have been reflecting on the question for several days, and I am not quite sure if I have the good answer or if there is a good answer. I think that we have to see it has two distinct parts: the artist and the viewer. By mentioning 2 distinct parts, I wondered if they cannot become one. This is where my work takes place - precision, where I would like to see my work taking place.

I am trying to obtain a maximum of audience for my work by putting it outdoor and reaching a new public, a public that has not been alerted. Does it mean that I become beneficiary of this action? Probably I am but it also help me resolving questions around the work and the position I take. On the other hand, I think that the viewer also benefit from this kind of interventions where he doesn't have to change is routine in order to see the work. I mean by that, he doesn't have to go to the museum or any other specific places to see a piece of art.

I guess I do not know exactly if the work become popularized, or if the artist take the credit or if there's no popularization. Talking recently with Jose about Lady GAGA, I think that she is the best example of who can we popularized a product, because of course I see her as a product! Here's a great article on her and her carrier. http://nymag.com/arts/popmusic/features/65127/

After reading this article I questioned if what is she doing is for the public, for her or for both? It seems that everyone takes advantage of it, but in order to consume it who far do we need to commercialized the work. This is like saying that some artists do not have their place in museums, but they are presented in those museums. Is there a matter of connexion, of talent, of chance?

I definitely think that I need to promote my work more in order to get a bigger audience. 2 weeks ago I was on South street, the crazy FLASH MOB night, with 50 heads and I felt that the work really took place in a popular culture. I loved it, does it mean that the work becomes popularized. Probably, and its maybe what I am looking for!

Link to some thinking about the SGC Conference

On my own blog, I have some thoughts about Saturday's panel from the SGC conference. I would greatly appreciate your comments on it...

Thanks - g

Does the Low Need the High More Than the High Needs the Low?

I think, in order to answer this question, it is important to define roughly what low and high mean to me. When I think of high art, I think of the kinds of master works you see in museums--large scale paintings and sculptures, refined pieces, pieces that fall into (however loosely) art movements that are known by a greater number of people. So what is its opposite? Low art is harder to define. Are we talking about the consumables? Package design, posters, ephemera? Graphic and industrial design? Album covers? Crafts? Or are we talking about outsider art? Pieces made with found or cheap, unconventional material? Messy and coarse art? Art that is never shown in museums and in few galleries aside from those niche galleries that show the work of their own kind? While I believe the question in the title of this article refers to the former idea, the more streamlined consumable art, I believe it is important to address this question of outsider art, too, because we often treat it as "lower" even if we claim to appreciate it.

While Pop Art clearly referenced the impact of consumer society in its Tomato Soup Cans and comic book halftone dots, the connection between high and low art is not always so obvious. High art, on one hand, often demonstrates the sentiments of the "higher" society of that time--the intellectuals, nobility, bourgeois, what have you. Low art, be it consumables or crafts, were much more attainable by the everyday person. Whether it was something they made or bought, these pieces, too, reflected the people.

I would guess that there was a switch at some time. Before the avant-garde, high art basically served to promote a certain type of lifestyle--a goal--for which people could aspire. Paintings of people dressed smartly, acting appropriately, were the norm. Since the dada, surealism, etc., high art has focused more on the criticism of people--what is wrong with society. Low art (meaning consumer goods or craft) continued to be goal-oriented.

Outsider art, however, is generally a combination of both. With the example of the Space1026 collaborative piece in the Print Center's Philagrafika show, you can see how the artists are referencing recognizable (yet other worldly) space--a yurt as seen in Turkey or Mongolia--but are marking it with colors and textures that are their own. It is not necessarily saying you should live here, but rather, what is it about living that is truly important? There are recognizable things in this yurt that you have in your home, and there are things that are not. Question your surroundings. Question what is important to you. In this way, in making a statement about life and goals, the yurt is an example of how outsider art can approximate hihg art. But a yurt, pillows, chairs, the interiors in general, are referencing craft (or low art) more than they are high. So, in this case, outsider art is referencing low art. Low art needs low art as a lexicon.

If collaborative works were given the credence of works made by the lone artist, if Space1026 had a piece bought by the MoMa, if the stars aligned in such a way that their work BECAME high art (simply by virtue of getting this level of recognition by the system), then it would go from being considered low art to high. Thing is, it won't.

People who are not from my generation may walk into the Print Center, and whether they like the Yurt or not, they will say something to the effect of "Wow, how unique!? How original?" As a Rhode Islander tapped into the print culture of Providence and Pawtucket, I looked at the Yurt and wondered if it had been made by Xander Maro. The connection between Space1026 and the remnants of Fort Thunder, the Dirt Palace, and other Olneyville, Providence enclaves, and the work coming out of other meccas of the hip (Detriot, Brooklyn, San Francisco), all have a "look." As Gerard pointed out, the outsider art of this kind of demographic, a mostly white, anglo-protestant, college-educated, skateboarding, noise rock listening subculture is different from the aesthetic of Self Help Graphics, whose posters happened to be situated right next to the Yurt.

Self Help is a group composed more of first or second generation latino americans, often the first in the family to go to college if. And these are but two of the kinds of "outsider" collaborations that exist. My point is not that Space1026 or Self Help do not make unique, innovative works. My point is outsider art lies in this weird inbetween spot, neither a blip on the radar nor the next wing of the modern art museums.

To compound the issue, national chain stores, like Urban Outfitters, coop the aesthetic of collaborations like Space1026 (either by hiring them to make window displays or products or outright stealing the fashion they wear and selling it to the masses). This connection between a slightly higher art and low art keeps outsider art from ever attaining the status of the true high art. It is never given the chance to shine because its pervasiveness in our pop culture pushes into the camp of cliche too early.

I feel like this sounds like I am anti-Space1026 and that couldn't be farther from the truth. There gallery openings are always on the top of my agenda and I, dare I say it, wish I were one of them. I think the spirit within Space1026 and collaboration is what will be the vanguard of the next art revolution. And I think it is unfortunate to say this, especially considering how I felt in the yurt (cozy and also stimulated to the nth degree), that Space1026 needs to modify (or completely overhaul) their aesthetic in order to divorce itself from the Urban Outfitters low art association.

In short, high and low art are so interrelated and overlapping, it is hard to distinguish one from the other. But because consumable low art is not taken seriously, in order to make a strong social commentary, outsider art needs to remain separate from consumable art, whether or not outsider art wants to be low or high.

La Resistencia

I consider that the Medium Resistance show got a simple objective which for me was easy to read. Art that meets and needs a craft process within.

This also makes us things about the new questions being made of that craft process and how that phenomenon is meeting with the new technologies or new historic junctures. New crafts? New mediums? and trough that new dialogues? Which sometimes one can tell how them fails. For me not all the works in the show meet as well as others. For example, I can understand the potential of the "projector boxes", but personally I can tell that they do not work and I feel they were out of context (place, theme, object, technology), they poorly connects and after all trying to look at the projected image can be frustrating.

Otherwise, other work were great not in the way they were crafted only but because of the subject matter for example the Radical Cartography for me is an amazing social deconstruction and the way craft approach to the project was super well managed. In other way, Piper Shepard's work was a great example on how to see a regular beautiful craftsmanship, easy to enjoy and gorgeous, the fact I personally did not like was her work in the middle with the pins. I thinks that was a curatorial mistake (the placing was to central and that tends to make more weight in the single artist).

Anyways at the end I felt that having a show like this between Philagraphika was a necessity. At the end there should be a space for new definitions and new questions every time you visit the subject of the contemporary art as this festival did.

Medium |resistance

Desire of beauty or desire of process? First think that came to my mind after seeing the show and comparing it to Moore College. In those 2 exhibitions I can completely feel the role of the curator(s) when its time to combine different artists in the same space. Which one is more intellectual, I'm not quite sure, and does it really matters? Again we are constantly between 2 phenomenons, art and craft, or art and design, or,... or,... or...!





Do Jeff Koon is a creator who hires craftsmans? Do his work is consider craft or creation? What is the step between the moment we call something art and craft? When I was in France, this concept was really present in our discussions. That's why french artists do not create any material art these days. The creation as to take place in their heads and when it becomes material, they talk about craft! Should we stop doing material art? It seems like people still enjoy to see figurative art more then anything else. Surveys can tell!





I would like to leave you on this youtube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbF54CBzDcU&feature=related



There is 3 parts, and the reason why I'm interested in this specific video his because I am curious to hear what is your opinion on the role of beauty. Alexander McQueen is, was the designer of Lady Gaga and committed suicide last month! I looked at the 3 parts several times and I am still looking for the beauty in the show. Models refused to walked for him because they were terrified! What is fashion today? Beauty or......

Teresa Jaynes lecture at Tyler

It didn't escape my notice that when she was talking about the logistics of planning Philagrafika's sprawling exhibit offerings, Teresa Jaynes (the artist who is their Executive Director) mentioned a blog the curatorial team kept to share and exchange ideas and images they scouted out work for the shows.

I really expect participants in this seminar to comment on one another's posts and to make observations about the shows you've seen and the issues they bring up. We've not heard much about the Medium Resistance Exhibit yet, for example.

This month, we're talking about popularization and through prints. Friday we'll be at the Print Center, and I will also want to talk about the Pablo Helguera videos (you can watch them all on YouTube, after you look at the series intro above). I know it's a busy time, but let's not lose sight of what we're talking about in seminar!

Curating and Risk

I had hoped to see some of you at the Curating and Risk symposium on March 13. Given the dissolved lines between artist and curator, the event had a lot to say to people in both areas of the field. Here are some impressions, and I have notes I can discuss in detail when I see you later this week.

Remember, I asked you to comment on a classmate's post before we meet on March 19.

We will meet at the Print Center on that day.

I would like to conduct class a little early that afternoon, if everyone is amenable. I'll contact you via email to set up a time.

Hope everyone enjoyed a productive break - now one more push to the end of the year...

A talk, related to Medium Resistance Topic

JULIA BRYAN-WILSON
Associate Professor, Department of Art History
University of California, Irvine
 
Craft Matters

Monday, March 15 @ 5 pm
Jaffe History of Art Building, Room 113
University of Pennsylvania

Many contemporary artists have taken up conventional textile techniques, not as a nostalgic return to the mark of the artist's hand, but to make diverse and timely political statements about wartime labor, process, and gendered production. This talk examines how artists in the last several decades use knitting, sewing, crocheting, and weaving to propose alternative economic and aesthetic models of making in the sweatshop era.

Community, Beauty and Pleasure

First of all I wanted to apologize for the delay in my contribution to the Printseminar Blog.

When I think about the relationship between art and community work, the first word that comes to my mind is "tool". The reason is very simple. The word "TOOL" might sound weird but is the best description to attach to the fact of one particular person using art as the medium to approach specific social issue and even further to contribute with a new constructive opinion. In other words for some individuals art is the tool trough they can approach to any kind of social change or social contribution (is the word sound better). My thinking on something as tool is so general because at the end the cause turn out to be more important than the medium and for this same reason I personally can admire a lot the things a group as Superflex does (even if I do not consider them art).

It might sound hard that art at this point can be positioned as second, but the emergency of the problems of our society now are worth it. Of course with this I'm not telling that every work of Pepon is doing this or any kind of social artwork aims correctly to the issue. Also I don't want anyone to be confused, I am not devaluating art that do not focus on social issues, that is a very personal decision. In the same way I can tell from a lots of works that had been done with a "social consciousness" that addresses more to a "HIP" kind of culture.

I personally can tell, before being on any kind of art school or college, I got the same preoccupation's and issues running trough my mind, first for me music was the tool, now is art. Other example; Doctor Vargas, Vidot, the guy made it and got his Medical Doctor degree. That in any place in the world can be a very socially accepted position. He can have a nice office, good secretary, etc. He decided to left that aside and help homeless persons and drug addicts for his living. Medicine was his tool.

So in few words life quality can be affected in some many ways and art is also part of it. And you can focus that approach in very different ways, economically, socially, psychologically. Back in Puerto Rico as a part of a collective effort, we occupied (with the owner permission, 90 years old lady), the oldest house of a slum near the university, and we transformed the abandoned house (with very limited funding), and part of the street.

-In more than ten years the lady and her son did not talked to anyone in the whole street (that day happened).

-Adding to the pasting and painting project of the house across the street we made a permanent installation (including a concrete bench that also work as a hand sculpture.)

-Economically the space worth rise up.

-Culturally the the cultural exchange in the place is much better.

Actually the visual pleasure of the experience of the street before and after is amazing. Just in the same corner there is a family owned bar cafeteria, were students gathered and were some other artist had made other artistic approaches leaving actually more profits to the owner of the place.

Personally in my work that is were beauty takes place. Not only by being in my studio enjoying the process of my work, but also having that other experience outside that enhanced the quality of life for me and for the witness. Is the possibility in some ways to simplified the message of the work or enhancing the aesthetics of that process in order to establish a conversation with any kind of spectator (even when I know everyone is going to have a different level of reading), but even that I want them to at some point address some single aspect of the issue I'm working with. I understand that the beauty of my work.

Sorry for any typos or bad spelling, but I'm getting better with time like wine, thanks guys for reading.

Jose Antonio Ortiz Pagan "O.T.S."

Curating Risk

 

Details on the Curating Risk symposium are available from this link. 

Though this is not a requirement of the seminar (it's spring break...I can't require it), it's a good idea to go if you're in town

Studio Practice

Sorry for not being part of the discussion last week.
Here's my reflexion on my reading:

Have you ever thought about being a visual artist WITHOUT a studio?
Have you ever thought about building a brick wall in front of the gallery where you have an openning? Who can enter????
Have you ever thought about going to the police office and telling them that someone stole your art work ( without having an artwork) taking the police document, framing it and putting it in a show because you had no idea what to create for that show?
Have you ever thought about recreating the exact same show as the one next door to your gallery in Paris, reproduction of the paintings, the prices, the installation, all that at the same time as the other "original" show?
Have you ever thought you could be one of the most famous artist in the world with these kind of interventions? Maurizio Cattelan neither! But here he is today in is 2 bedrooms appart in New York city without any studio. Is best friend, only family and love: is cell phone. All the time being in contact with collectors, managers, directors and so on, he builds his career on what people as to offer to him and then he creates!
Creating doesn"t meen touching, building, manipulating, sanding, painting or printing for Cattelan. It meens having an idea : "I see that art has a great potential to refer to a broader debate, to go out there and reach an incredible audience."The most important sculptures created by Maurizio are physically made by Daniel Druet, a master of moulage who did several scultures for Cattelan like JFK, The Pope, Hitler.
Reading this article changes my vision of a studio practice. We spend so many hours in the studio without nowing who will really see the work. Maurizio spend the major part of his time finding where and WHO IS GOING TO COMMISION his creations...............and then he creates!

finally....

I have been thinking about the topic of beauty, the exhibition at Moore and Pepon's talk. I appreciated the show at Moore in different ways. All of the works were designed to be aware of space and attracts the viewers to interact with the pieces. Most of the works defiantly took the experience of the work to the extreme by presenting very attractive bold black and white graphic quality images. The flatness of the picture gives the viewer an exclusive illusion. You automatically built a relationship of experience between the line, shape, space and you. You are basically experiencing the fundamental elements of art making. I believe all works of art begins with ideas and as an artist you have to give people to think about through your work. The artists in the Moore exhibition took simple images and made them to very attractive pieces. I'm indifferent about their images(subject) but I like the idea that how they played with the fundamental elements of art making and beauty and presented is as what it is. "What you see is what you see" Stella.

Pepon's work has a different element of interacting with the viewers. I'm not familiar with Pepon's approach to the community but listening to his talk gave an idea of how the process is done. I have also watch his Art 21 episode and it seemed like he interacts with the people(community) in a more direct way.He interacts with people in a everyday life situation. He recreates the stories of the people through his work and encourage students to interact and listen the stories of the people. I'm not sure how the process really works but it seems very personal. Pepon is defiantly changing the relationship of experiencing the art making. He is taking the experiences of the space and veiwer and the maker to the extreme as well. There are no pre conception to his work unlike the Moore exhibition. However, I'm not sure if the message of the work that his students did are communicating well to the viewers. I would like to understand and learn more about the experience that the students. The idea of beauty in this case will be the process of the making and interacting with the community.

In relation to all of the exhibitions and finally to my work, beauty it plays a very important role. If I had to choose one exhibition that I can fit in more will be the the Moore. I understand the bold graphic marks and process of image making. I usually master the process and take control of the process of my work. I give myself a challenge myself with different elements when I am engaging myself in the process. During the process I fight my aesthetic judgements in the process of making. Meaning the aesthetic intuitions overcomes through and sometimes takes over the image. I am totally figuring out what I'm trying to and I'm not sure of why I'm doing what I'm doing. However, I know that i can make something attractive and I'm not sure what I will be the best solution to me.

Material Resistance Essay Now Available

Hey - I know you've been eagerly awaiting your chance to read the essay for the Medium Resistance: Revolutionary Tendencies in Print and Craft, and now you can! Go find it at our class website's readings page...download it as a PDF...read it and be ready to talk about it when I see you later this week...

free tickets to the armory fair

http://eblasts.armoryartsweek.com.s3.amazonaws.com/ARM-0010/
index_tasGallery.html