I haven't seen the work in person so I'll keep an open mind but it looks very derivative of Gedi Sibony...so I'm curious what the artist has to say about the work.
Gedi is a great artist. I would probably point to a few other artist before i compared Gedi's work to mine but what are you gonna do. The one thing that we do have in common is our working process, that being we both arrange more than we build (of course, if building was what was called for then one must build). For me, the idea comes first then comes the medium. So I might use a photograph or paint or collage. With these photos i tried to compile like-minded pieces with each piece consisting of a kinda balancing act (literally and conceptually). I tend to use familiar, domestic forms in my work which has become a consistent "comment and criticism" of everyday life.
I'll have to see the work in person sometime...its definitely well installed I'm just waiting for someone to take this practice which is becoming ubiquitous with intelligent young artists (and Yale grads) and push it to the next level. I don't mean to be insulting but I have to clear my mind so I don't automatically dismiss the work for being too safe.
There are reactions to every significant movement and I think many artists and critics are getting exhausted looking at spare installations that don't operate with a formal quality as powerful as Genzken, Tuttle, or Stockholder.
I know many people might not be happy with these statements but I think the work is dry. There is an aesthetic monopoly and I'm certainly ready for some change.
One thing that's interesting to me is you said you don't want to "dismiss the work for being too safe". I'm curious as too when domestic forms and familiar objects was ever "not safe". They have always been something of comfort for me and work on that level. The question of being "safe" or not shouldn't even be in your vocabulary. Perception is everything. whats "safe" for you might be "outrageous" for some. Also, if artist worked around the wishes of whether critics were exhausted or not we would never get anything done.
I feel like arguing over the "safeness" of work is a tired debate. Genzken, Tuttle, or Stockholder didn't come out of the gate with their most exciting work, and the same goes for other young artists. I also don't see how a works relative freshness of concept relates to it's position as safe or unsafe. These critical ideas seem like they should occupy a different space to me. I'm excited, we are actually getting some conversation happening here!
I thought you made some valid points, but i disagree that there is an aesthetic monopoly. There may be a certain predilection among artists and gallerists to display work in a particular fashion or following a trend. However, in most cases I feel much of the work is very dissimilar, but only appears so based on the way in which it is installed.
@Kevin, i dont feel attacked. I'm actually happy that a critical argument is happening and that organically its going somewhere. @Ian, i hear ya about the works being dissimilar, certain pieces happened at different times. It's only after objects are established can I arrange and manipulate. the outcome is never the same and the forms can be used in different ways.
The limp ring of fire says: I admit my inability to burn you. I know I couldn’t begin to captivate your already surfeited gaze, but maybe I can trick you with vague minimalism. Perhaps the intention of such vagueness is to elude the oppression of logic, thus engaging the viewer’s wonderment via mysticism. But this puts illusiveness into a position of dominance, and so in effect the work says: look at me, relate to me, but wait, don’t look at me, don’t understand me. It wants undivided attention yet refuses to look the viewer in the eyes, like a lover who wants to be loved unconditionally but can’t directly say I love you, and I need you in return. This puts the works back against the wall. The artists wishes for it to speak on behalf of them, yet drowns it out with distracting abstraction, dooming the work to incoherence. The only thing saving it is the viewer’s interpretation – which will invent the works meaning. But this is not the viewer’s intention. The viewers just want to save themselves from the embarrassment of not comprehending, so they are compelled to rant fantastically about the works potentiality (this rant is no exception). They trample and stomp out any concise intentions of the artist with their frantic speculations. This in a sense renders any previous contemplation the artist may have had concerning the work as redundant. It is actually the birth point of the work, the moment it comes to mean anything. Subsequently, this erases the original idea and thus the artist. So go ahead viewer think something, anything you want, you can’t get burned. Though, don’t look into it too deeply or you might smash your face into a mute white plane…
(I was going to write a more general comment but got stuck on the first object I saw. Plus I think this comment can carry to the other works. Also, it is less directed at Chris and his work specifically, and more at all of us who make art. Thanks – Vince Troia)
The evidence could never be more present in the fact that we exist as fluid and our definition is in flux. Not only do our attempts at developing meaning trudge through a liquid abyss, but we are up to our chests not sure of what we're stepping on. When that of course is realized we are then at a wonderful vulnerable state, opening up the inlet and searching for the delta. Lift your feet and release. My only concern is that the difficulty of this stroke is not seen as ample opportunity to evolve beyond the status quo. Please hit that mute white plane because only then will you realize that you are still alive. I feel the pressure is too great for any object to bear all the weight of the human psyche. We believe in these objects and in some cases they hold up well, but that only stems from the strength of intention- which is a journey. There must be a moment of taking responsibility and seeing the just in all actions/objects/thoughts/and sound. I appreciate when the snow gives back footprints.
So when considering the viewer to object relationship are we being appropriate? Do we want to live virtually instead of really? do these objects carry more conversation in a gallery, or a blog? Or should they be in an apartment amongst a dining room get together?
damn vince just put the gun down, it's gonna be alright you need to easy off them brain pages
- its f r e e d o m f o l k s we got enough cops -
i think most all of us are aiming these joints at the total eclipse - enough fake ass half hearted academic slander blah blah blahs i got love for any bodies willing to step out and try an move the ones it's hard to stay alive each one freak one grow this thing -- tend to it understanding takes time and this c r i t i c a l thing yall are talking about is looking to me like fear and trembling
i challenge you all to find a concious approach i mean to say find the work/structure left you, and add to it, help it be white light and off the wall--------small wonder we should all write poetry to one another thats what letters are good for and gas faces get gone
and seriously, as for this work here i been coming back to it every few days waiting right now im with that chair and plastic and im into that antigravity fire loop old flames i think being barely able to find a spark is something all of us overkilled youth suffer our parents fell asleep at the wheel and now theres elbows everywhere
fuck, im burnt an people need to quit throwin minimilism around -- emptiness is age old and bigger than juds/duds. also - artist intention is irrelevant it means nothing -fact, even in beloved academia.
i'd like to see more and in person chris keep pushing up
and since we’s poetically steeped then ima let it be street -
cant put gun down im a weapon you a weapon its sun-down everybody - fearful trembling, cocked, loaded, and unsound
of course the artworks not as one dimensional as rendered notes here invented slow my rant was just a telescope (zoomin in neglects whole) like the focus of every word, glance, an gesture innately eclipses all actual blinds ideal – but actuals sad – ideal seems a better scope we just tryin’ to get in control – violence is inevitable.
why the blog bogged with ego fog? cuz blah blah blah is always blow blow blow
tell me to chill out but beckon a challenge? peep your design reckon your malice
cant get burned, we’re born fire I was merely lamenting over the bonfire
we all cops – planet policin jailing nonsense with reason until its in agreement with what we want
ok so you slang it with slick talk clever wordplay – a crypt walk but your still dancing on the works face its just slyly killed off
and yeah me too Im sittin with that plastic and chair I can peep it- its kinda lookin like us - gasping for air
gasping for magic like back when newborn thought had it but it grew up, got a gallery job, and the illusion vanished oh no god dammit! back to the drawing board - cant quite cuz the artists intention is to transcend the planet
and fuck yes everything I speak is lifted – already got said where you get your thoughts? all from your head?
(pardon me chris for neglecting giving a real diagnosis of your work, but I had to answer mr. smiff. I actually like most of the work you put out there. I identify with your aesthetic, plus you’re a solid dude. yeah im a bit intense most of the time but who gives a fuck its just tiny me with tiny werdz. blah blah blog)
(oh and smiff I disagree with you that artist intension is irrelevant, but more on that in a bit and probably not on this blog)
ok im going to switch dialects and end vamped dialectics
i liked your first post better vince it was more pathetic and introverted and because of that somehow more endearing
and it's not street to me just easy and feels smoother coming across my keyboard
ok so now lets all get wild west digi
so ya see thur thayt wudnt exactla wut i wasa thinkin wen i proclaimed a need fer poeticus
wus thinkin maybe about sum kinly vision yall know wut i mean? like the way poetics seek to rangle the most outlaw and language avoidant idears but i guess nursery rhyms will do seein how much of this is kids playin with poo and gosh dern it if i aint messn with that dern flu pigs fly yall know that so anything is possible
*and yes yes lets talk about this artist intention thing. i'd love for you to situate that.or try anyway
you got power bro for real and that is why im sparing with you brains for sure but bring that heart too thats my request
Meester Samuels...who's ready to discuss this? I feel like I can't start because I'm unfairly biased.
ReplyDeleteunfairly biased? how do you mean?
ReplyDelete...because we run a gallery together, occasionally work together, etc. So clearly, I respect your work.
ReplyDeleteI haven't seen the work in person so I'll keep an open mind but it looks very derivative of Gedi Sibony...so I'm curious what the artist has to say about the work.
ReplyDeleteGedi is a great artist. I would probably point to a few other artist before i compared Gedi's work to mine but what are you gonna do. The one thing that we do have in common is our working process, that being we both arrange more than we build (of course, if building was what was called for then one must build). For me, the idea comes first then comes the medium. So I might use a photograph or paint or collage. With these photos i tried to compile like-minded pieces with each piece consisting of a kinda balancing act (literally and conceptually). I tend to use familiar, domestic forms in my work which has become a consistent "comment and criticism" of everyday life.
ReplyDeletei remember speaking with you at the artcenterbuilding mtclemens and your space is nice.
ReplyDelete1star warz
2pulp fiction
3star trek
as if lifes a movie- you know?
word.
ReplyDeleteI'll have to see the work in person sometime...its definitely well installed I'm just waiting for someone to take this practice which is becoming ubiquitous with intelligent young artists (and Yale grads) and push it to the next level. I don't mean to be insulting but I have to clear my mind so I don't automatically dismiss the work for being too safe.
ReplyDeleteThere are reactions to every significant movement and I think many artists and critics are getting exhausted looking at spare installations that don't operate with a formal quality as powerful as Genzken, Tuttle, or Stockholder.
I know many people might not be happy with these statements but I think the work is dry. There is an aesthetic monopoly and I'm certainly ready for some change.
One thing that's interesting to me is you said you don't want to "dismiss the work for being too safe". I'm curious as too when domestic forms and familiar objects was ever "not safe". They have always been something of comfort for me and work on that level. The question of being "safe" or not shouldn't even be in your vocabulary. Perception is everything. whats "safe" for you might be "outrageous" for some. Also, if artist worked around the wishes of whether critics were exhausted or not we would never get anything done.
ReplyDeleteI feel like arguing over the "safeness" of work is a tired debate. Genzken, Tuttle, or Stockholder didn't come out of the gate with their most exciting work, and the same goes for other young artists. I also don't see how a works relative freshness of concept relates to it's position as safe or unsafe. These critical ideas seem like they should occupy a different space to me. I'm excited, we are actually getting some conversation happening here!
ReplyDeleteI agree, i've never thought about or considered the question "is this safe or not?". In that regards, the issue itself is irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteThat was me, by the way. Posted under the wrong account.
ReplyDeleteI'm not responding to the work the way I'd like to, everyone has different vocabulary for critiquing art.
ReplyDeleteI wasn't aware safe was a "four letter word."
The point of a critical blog is to voice opinions, this is not to be taken as an insult or an attack on Chris as an artist.
I thought you made some valid points, but i disagree that there is an aesthetic monopoly. There may be a certain predilection among artists and gallerists to display work in a particular fashion or following a trend. However, in most cases I feel much of the work is very dissimilar, but only appears so based on the way in which it is installed.
ReplyDelete@Kevin, i dont feel attacked. I'm actually happy that a critical argument is happening and that organically its going somewhere.
ReplyDelete@Ian, i hear ya about the works being dissimilar, certain pieces happened at different times. It's only after objects are established can I arrange and manipulate. the outcome is never the same and the forms can be used in different ways.
I meant the work amongst artists working in this fashion is mostly dissimilar, not you in particular.
ReplyDeleteThe limp ring of fire says: I admit my inability to burn you. I know I couldn’t begin to captivate your already surfeited gaze, but maybe I can trick you with vague minimalism. Perhaps the intention of such vagueness is to elude the oppression of logic, thus engaging the viewer’s wonderment via mysticism. But this puts illusiveness into a position of dominance, and so in effect the work says: look at me, relate to me, but wait, don’t look at me, don’t understand me. It wants undivided attention yet refuses to look the viewer in the eyes, like a lover who wants to be loved unconditionally but can’t directly say I love you, and I need you in return. This puts the works back against the wall. The artists wishes for it to speak on behalf of them, yet drowns it out with distracting abstraction, dooming the work to incoherence. The only thing saving it is the viewer’s interpretation – which will invent the works meaning. But this is not the viewer’s intention. The viewers just want to save themselves from the embarrassment of not comprehending, so they are compelled to rant fantastically about the works potentiality (this rant is no exception). They trample and stomp out any concise intentions of the artist with their frantic speculations. This in a sense renders any previous contemplation the artist may have had concerning the work as redundant. It is actually the birth point of the work, the moment it comes to mean anything. Subsequently, this erases the original idea and thus the artist. So go ahead viewer think something, anything you want, you can’t get burned. Though, don’t look into it too deeply or you might smash your face into a mute white plane…
ReplyDelete(I was going to write a more general comment but got stuck on the first object I saw. Plus I think this comment can carry to the other works. Also, it is less directed at Chris and his work specifically, and more at all of us who make art. Thanks – Vince Troia)
The evidence could never be more present in the fact that we exist as fluid and our definition is in flux. Not only do our attempts at developing meaning trudge through a liquid abyss, but we are up to our chests not sure of what we're stepping on. When that of course is realized we are then at a wonderful vulnerable state, opening up the inlet and searching for the delta. Lift your feet and release. My only concern is that the difficulty of this stroke is not seen as ample opportunity to evolve beyond the status quo. Please hit that mute white plane because only then will you realize that you are still alive. I feel the pressure is too great for any object to bear all the weight of the human psyche. We believe in these objects and in some cases they hold up well, but that only stems from the strength of intention- which is a journey. There must be a moment of taking responsibility and seeing the just in all actions/objects/thoughts/and sound. I appreciate when the snow gives back footprints.
ReplyDeleteSo when considering the viewer to object relationship are we being appropriate? Do we want to live virtually instead of really?
do these objects carry more conversation in a gallery, or a blog? Or should they be in an apartment amongst a dining room get together?
-kbeas
damn vince
ReplyDeletejust put the gun down, it's gonna be alright
you need to easy off them brain pages
- its f r e e d o m f o l k s
we got enough cops -
i think most all of us are aiming these joints at the total eclipse - enough fake ass half hearted academic slander blah blah blahs
i got love for any bodies willing to step out and try an move the ones
it's hard to stay alive
each one freak one
grow this thing -- tend to it
understanding takes time
and this c r i t i c a l thing yall are talking about is looking to me like fear and trembling
i challenge you all to find a concious approach
i mean to say find the work/structure left you, and add to it, help it be white light and off the wall--------small wonder
we should all write poetry to one another
thats what letters are good for
and gas faces get gone
and seriously, as for this work here
i been coming back to it every few days waiting
right now im with that chair and plastic
and im into that antigravity fire loop
old flames
i think being barely able to find a spark is something all of us overkilled youth suffer
our parents fell asleep at the wheel
and now theres elbows everywhere
fuck, im burnt
an people need to quit throwin minimilism around --
emptiness is age old and bigger than juds/duds.
also - artist intention is irrelevant
it means nothing -fact, even in beloved academia.
i'd like to see more and in person chris
keep pushing up
word. heard and observed.
ReplyDeleteand since we’s poetically steeped
then ima let it be street -
cant put gun down
im a weapon
you a weapon
its sun-down
everybody - fearful trembling,
cocked, loaded, and unsound
of course the artworks not as one dimensional
as rendered notes here invented slow
my rant was just a telescope (zoomin in neglects whole)
like the focus of every word, glance, an gesture innately eclipses all
actual blinds ideal – but actuals sad – ideal seems a better scope
we just tryin’ to get in control – violence is inevitable.
why the blog bogged with ego fog?
cuz blah blah blah is always blow blow blow
tell me to chill out
but beckon a challenge?
peep your design
reckon your malice
cant get burned, we’re born fire
I was merely lamenting over the bonfire
we all cops –
planet policin
jailing nonsense with reason
until its in agreement with what we want
ok so you slang it with slick talk
clever wordplay – a crypt walk
but your still dancing on the works face
its just slyly killed off
and yeah me too
Im sittin with that plastic and chair
I can peep it- its kinda lookin like us - gasping for air
gasping for magic
like back when
newborn thought had it
but it grew up, got a gallery job, and the illusion vanished
oh no god dammit!
back to the drawing board - cant quite
cuz the artists intention is to transcend the planet
and fuck yes
everything I speak is lifted – already got said
where you get your thoughts?
all from your head?
(pardon me chris for neglecting giving a real diagnosis of your work, but I had to answer mr. smiff. I actually like most of the work you put out there. I identify with your aesthetic, plus you’re a solid dude. yeah im a bit intense most of the time but who gives a fuck its just tiny me with tiny werdz. blah blah blog)
(oh and smiff I disagree with you that artist intension is irrelevant, but more on that in a bit and probably not on this blog)
i hear ya - i hear all of it.
ReplyDeletevince
smiff
hit me up
chris@debtcollective.com
come to the studio
or better yet, come out to mona any day you'd like im in need of some push.
ok im going to switch dialects
ReplyDeleteand end vamped dialectics
i liked your first post better vince
it was more pathetic and introverted
and because of that somehow more endearing
and it's not street to me just easy
and feels smoother coming across my keyboard
ok so now lets all get wild west digi
so ya see thur
thayt wudnt exactla wut i wasa thinkin wen i proclaimed a need fer poeticus
wus thinkin maybe about sum kinly vision
yall know wut i mean?
like the way poetics seek to rangle the most outlaw and language avoidant idears
but i guess nursery rhyms will do
seein how much of this is kids playin with poo
and gosh dern it if i aint messn with
that dern flu
pigs fly yall know that
so anything is possible
*and yes yes lets talk about this artist intention thing. i'd love for you to situate that.or try anyway
you got power bro
for real
and that is why im sparing with you
brains for sure
but bring that heart too
thats my request
ohh and im not real fond of mr smiff
ReplyDeletei'd prefer you call me mike
or even dad
but lets keep it informal
no mr.