Perversion PP
Perversion CGL
Perversion ADeV
Perversion MC
Friday, January 30, 2009
"Perversions"
These "Perversions" are drawings based off of other pieces of art that are famous and/or I admire for one reason or another. The Perversions are interesting for me because I get to learn a little bit about the way the original artist designed and executed the works as I filter them through myself to create my perverted versions of them.
Perversion PP
Perversion CGL
Perversion ADeV
Perversion MC
Perversion PP
Perversion CGL
Perversion ADeV
Perversion MC
Thursday, January 22, 2009
On the Nature of the Artist and Space Exporation
For a period of time I thought being a "professional" artist was one of the most selfish of all assumed means by which to make a living. "Professional" is in quotations because it is somewhat of an odd word to precede that of "artist," for at what point does one become a professional artist? What quality of work must they produce for how much money at how frequent a rate to be considered a professional artist? Who decides that an artist is professional? Perhaps there is not a specific point in time one can pin-point and say "Billy Cheddargrape is a professional sculptor...NOW!" but rather might be one of those things were an artist or the world wakes up one day and realizes Mr. Cheddargrape is a professional artist. Maybe I am complicating the issue by failing to acknowledge the fact that a profession is the activity one engages in as their main mode of income, so when an artist is financially supporting themselves through their art, I suppose they have become a professional artist. However, my main means of income right now is supervising dogs at a doggy daycare, yet I would hardly consider myself a professional "Canine Activity Supervisor (CAS)." This seems to be an elusive butterfly of a question which I don't think I can net now. Anyways, I've gotten off the subject of my original idea long ago, with the beginning of the second sentence;
the selfish, conceited nature of the artist, that's what I meant to fill the last 20ish lines of this entry with. That used to be my opinion of the professional artist; he/she is a person who has chosen to forego making any tangible contribution to society, like that of a teacher or baker, and spend countless hours hermited away from friends and neo-Nazis (the latter of the two is a good thing) and an average social life in the pursuit of...well who knows what. Artists are driven by a variety of things, whether it be recognition/fame, money, self-expression, the desire to emote/incite/inspire, or simply an unquenchable obsession where they need to constantly, to some degree, whether it be all the time or less frequently but nonetheless their whole life, create. I realize I have just stated something contradictory: is not the act of inspiring contributive to society? Oh yes, certainly it is, and as I have grown I have come to realize this truth. So I am happy to say that the artist who seeks to do this is not as selfish and dare I say, useless, as an artist who merely seeks fame and money only. How would one who seeks fame and money through art even reach such a point? The artists who are destined to become famous and/or rich (poor Van Gogh) become so on account of their purity of purpose (Picasso was an anomaly of this, for he did wish to become a superstar. Although there is nothing wrong with that ambition as long as purpose and truth in one's art precedes the desire of fame, and to be honest I don't know which came first with Picasso; maybe he's not an anomaly). They have something to say that they believe in so strongly that they devote large periods of time to it, which shows in the end and thus respect and admiration is gained. An artist who before anything wants to be famous has chosen to travel a path built on nothing, or maybe quicksand or hot coals, and they will not reach any level of real respect unless they wise up and have something to say.
The artist who has no choice but to create something out of nothing, or rather a combination of often times otherwise useless items, like paint or a crayon, things which serve no other purpose than to make something new on a two-dimensional surface (unless one uses them in sculpture), I feel shares qualities akin to an inventor or explorer. Most artists have within them this obsessive quality, yet there are quite a few out there who "hate to make art," even though they may be incredibly good, even amazing. I use to hate making art at times, on account of the fact that I held the work I made too precious, wanting every thing I did to be a masterpiece, and stressing throughout the whole process in anticipation of the catastrophic brushstroke that would turn my Mona Lisa into a >insert the name of a piece of art that you loathe<. I can understand why an artist would hate to make art, but I think when this happens the artist is not doing what they really want to do; they are making art for others and not for themselves, for their own enjoyment. An artist is like an inventor or explorer because they seek truth and new knowledge; they seek truth in themselves or the world by touching and feeling their media and manipulating in such a way as to shine light on certain aspects of life. They are exploring through art, it is their way of absorbing, digesting, and regurgitating the world or themselves to those around them, and some, probably most, artists hope the world will listen and learn/feel something new and/or powerful. Whether or not they want recognition depends on the artist, but we, as humans, are, or should be, driven by the desire to learn more about whatever it is we are interested in. We all want to experience the new and unknown, some just on a grander scale than others. Some may want to live their whole lives in a basement, but they probably want to explore new levels of new video games or new seasons of new shows. Some want to figure out how the universe works, which I can empathize with and feel space exploration is one of the most important things we as a species can do, yet unfortunately we have been preoccupied with our trivial, useless issues here on earth for some time, thanks to our overly complex, destructive big brains (read "Galapagos" by Kurt Vonnegut to really get what I mean here. I would explain it myself but Kurt I'm sure does a better job in a much more entertaining way). I mean, how can there be anyone who doesn't want to learn about where we came from and what else is out there in the universe? Okay, I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who don't really care, but they should. That is the whole point of everything, to know the truth about the universe. Nothing else really matters. And if we do somehow find the answers, which we won't anytime soon and most likely ever, then what do we do? Will we be able to do anything? Are we as a species fated to live out our days on this planet, maybe Mars also, and disappear from "existence" never knowing the truth? Most likely I say, but all we can do is explore the next closest enigma, whether it be for example an artist discovering something new about themselves, or a young adult being deeply affected by a newly found piece of art or literature, opening the flood-gates to a new level of maturity and understanding, setting into motion the events that would see BARACK OBAMA ELECTED AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. HOLLAAAAA!!!!
the selfish, conceited nature of the artist, that's what I meant to fill the last 20ish lines of this entry with. That used to be my opinion of the professional artist; he/she is a person who has chosen to forego making any tangible contribution to society, like that of a teacher or baker, and spend countless hours hermited away from friends and neo-Nazis (the latter of the two is a good thing) and an average social life in the pursuit of...well who knows what. Artists are driven by a variety of things, whether it be recognition/fame, money, self-expression, the desire to emote/incite/inspire, or simply an unquenchable obsession where they need to constantly, to some degree, whether it be all the time or less frequently but nonetheless their whole life, create. I realize I have just stated something contradictory: is not the act of inspiring contributive to society? Oh yes, certainly it is, and as I have grown I have come to realize this truth. So I am happy to say that the artist who seeks to do this is not as selfish and dare I say, useless, as an artist who merely seeks fame and money only. How would one who seeks fame and money through art even reach such a point? The artists who are destined to become famous and/or rich (poor Van Gogh) become so on account of their purity of purpose (Picasso was an anomaly of this, for he did wish to become a superstar. Although there is nothing wrong with that ambition as long as purpose and truth in one's art precedes the desire of fame, and to be honest I don't know which came first with Picasso; maybe he's not an anomaly). They have something to say that they believe in so strongly that they devote large periods of time to it, which shows in the end and thus respect and admiration is gained. An artist who before anything wants to be famous has chosen to travel a path built on nothing, or maybe quicksand or hot coals, and they will not reach any level of real respect unless they wise up and have something to say.
The artist who has no choice but to create something out of nothing, or rather a combination of often times otherwise useless items, like paint or a crayon, things which serve no other purpose than to make something new on a two-dimensional surface (unless one uses them in sculpture), I feel shares qualities akin to an inventor or explorer. Most artists have within them this obsessive quality, yet there are quite a few out there who "hate to make art," even though they may be incredibly good, even amazing. I use to hate making art at times, on account of the fact that I held the work I made too precious, wanting every thing I did to be a masterpiece, and stressing throughout the whole process in anticipation of the catastrophic brushstroke that would turn my Mona Lisa into a >insert the name of a piece of art that you loathe<. I can understand why an artist would hate to make art, but I think when this happens the artist is not doing what they really want to do; they are making art for others and not for themselves, for their own enjoyment. An artist is like an inventor or explorer because they seek truth and new knowledge; they seek truth in themselves or the world by touching and feeling their media and manipulating in such a way as to shine light on certain aspects of life. They are exploring through art, it is their way of absorbing, digesting, and regurgitating the world or themselves to those around them, and some, probably most, artists hope the world will listen and learn/feel something new and/or powerful. Whether or not they want recognition depends on the artist, but we, as humans, are, or should be, driven by the desire to learn more about whatever it is we are interested in. We all want to experience the new and unknown, some just on a grander scale than others. Some may want to live their whole lives in a basement, but they probably want to explore new levels of new video games or new seasons of new shows. Some want to figure out how the universe works, which I can empathize with and feel space exploration is one of the most important things we as a species can do, yet unfortunately we have been preoccupied with our trivial, useless issues here on earth for some time, thanks to our overly complex, destructive big brains (read "Galapagos" by Kurt Vonnegut to really get what I mean here. I would explain it myself but Kurt I'm sure does a better job in a much more entertaining way). I mean, how can there be anyone who doesn't want to learn about where we came from and what else is out there in the universe? Okay, I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who don't really care, but they should. That is the whole point of everything, to know the truth about the universe. Nothing else really matters. And if we do somehow find the answers, which we won't anytime soon and most likely ever, then what do we do? Will we be able to do anything? Are we as a species fated to live out our days on this planet, maybe Mars also, and disappear from "existence" never knowing the truth? Most likely I say, but all we can do is explore the next closest enigma, whether it be for example an artist discovering something new about themselves, or a young adult being deeply affected by a newly found piece of art or literature, opening the flood-gates to a new level of maturity and understanding, setting into motion the events that would see BARACK OBAMA ELECTED AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. HOLLAAAAA!!!!
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
