Temporary installation art/Public art

The above image is an example of public art. From the looks of things I would guess that it is also probably impromptu public art. This is art created freely and spontaneously.

Another example of this type of art was posted in the New York Observer . This story was about an abandoned area of Long Island. Artists took over and made it their own. The full story can be read here.

Spontaneous creation is good for artists and non-artists alike. I think it opens the mind and frees space from random thoughts. The creativity also offers an opportunity to grow in terms of expression. Your thoughts?

Artists and documentation

Recently an artist decided to visually depict how a Mc Donald’s hamburger and fries does not decompose. The full story can be found here. I think it is interesting that it was an artist that decided to illustrate this point, and I also think she did a nice job.

The idea was to keep a McDonald’s burger and fries, and photograph it each day. It has been six months and there has been no change in the way the food looks; no mold, no breakdown, nothing.

This was a very effective way of making the point that this food is not in any way healthy. Artists have historically documented ideas and experiments, but it has been centuries since this role has had a significant impact. The reaction from the public, as well as from the corporate offices of McDonald’s has been swift. I’m not saying artists should look for ways to anger or frustrate people, but I do think they have a responsibility to get people thinking and talking, and this project did exactly that.

Painting unearthed

A painting by Giovanni Boldini was recently discovered in a Paris apartment. The apartment had been locked up and unoccupied for the last 70 years. The news item can be read in full here. Information about the artist can be accessed here.

This discovery has made the value of Boldini art increase. In addition, on-line searches for this artist have also risen. I think it is interesting that one painting discovered in a Paris apartment could cause such a stir. I also think it is interesting that more people have become curious about the work of Boldini. I like that an artist can create a sense of buzz about their work, years after death without much more occurring than the unlocking of a closed door.

A sample of his work can viewed below.

Doodles

This posting is about doodles. I have been thinking about doodles, and why people make them for some time. I find it interesting that someone who claims he/she cannot draw will instinctively start doodling on the page in a distracted moment. I think this furthers the thought that drawing is automatic, and part of the human experience.

This thought on doodles has lead me to incorporate a series of doodles into my most recent work. I have been collecting doodles from people for about a year. I have assembled them together in a collage, and this will be applied on top of another image. This collaborative effort reflects my thoughts as well as the thoughts of the people who created the doodles. If you doodle, what do you include?

Trouble in Venice

This weeks post is about a controversy brewing surrounding an Irish artist that is to be represented at the Venice Biennale next year. The full story can be read here.

Essentially, the artist and the Representative selected to curate the Irish contribution to this international exhibition come from the same gallery in New York. The article explained how decisions were made, and elaborates on why this is such an issue.

The major issue is the accepted practice for the juror to be unbiased when selecting artworks for inclusion in a exhibition. This is not the first example contradicting this practice that I have come across. It has been my experience that if the artist knows the juror, and especially if the juror is very familiar with the artwork, then chances are very good that that artist will be admitted.

Major exhibitions should be based on double blind admissions. However, the contemporary art world is pretty small and I'm not sure how one could guarantee anonymity. Perhaps if a show relied on average art enthusiasts instead of established art historians, art critics, and gallery owners as jurors, a true blind submission process could be established.

How Artists Work

On a recent road trip that went through the Quad Cities area, I was listening to a radio interview with the Arts Educational personnel at the Figge Art Museum in Davenport, IA. (A link to the museum website is here.) It was a very interesting interview that discussed art as communication, relating art to the everyday world, and how both children and adults responded to art. I was in agreement with much of what these educators had to say. However the discussion on artists and the way artists work was an area that I could not see eye-to-eye, and feel I must comment.

A member of the Figge staff was explaining her view on the relevance of art in relation to how artists remain productive. She commented that distractions and outside personal commitments could sometimes slow production. She also added that when the artist is not in the studio everyday devoting 100% of his/her time to art making this represents the beginning of giving up.

I disagree with this line of thought. Much of what makes art successful is based on experience and observation. I believe that an artist must spend an equal amount of time outside the studio observing and experiencing life and human interaction as in the studio working. It has been my experience that art making is a successive process that builds on the ideas and thoughts of predecessors in much the same way science is built on previous scientific discoveries.

A favorite artist of mine (John Piper) once described production down time as opportune for artists to explore and research the ideas that influence how he/she works. I would add that by engaging in this method of working, a context for the art work is established. If an artist truly spent all efforts in the studio the quality of those works would be lackluster.

Garage Sale Find

According to several news outlets, a California man (Rick Norsigian ) claims to have unearthed a number of original Ansel Adams film negatives. The story from the BBC News can be read here.

Verification on the authenticity of these negatives is in dispute. People from both viewpoints have commented on this issue. From the article, it seems that the central theme of these arguments is whether or not Mr. Norsigian should profit from his find.

Establishing the dollar amount of any one work of art is often an inconsistent process. Many factors go into this decision, including the “brand name” of the artist. Artists’ names fluctuate in popularity just as companies on the stock market. I would add however, that this is unimportant.

I have often made the comparison between the visual arts and literature. Both are forms of communication, and they are both frequently used to tell a story. With regards to the visual arts, I think how that story is told and how the viewer responds to the story has far more value than a monetary sum. The same could be said for literature as well. While original manuscripts from authors have a high dollar amount, people don’t really purchase and trade these items. They are reprinted and people acquire their favorites because of the content.

To own a work of art, regardless of the media, only for its dollar amount is not a wise decision. If one enjoys the work, let that be the reason to own it. Do you agree?