Messy Chihuahua Art

I have a few Chihuahuas in-house right now. Today I played with Desi ... and I do mean "play". His proof will be uploaded tomorrow and there will be some milder options for his human to choose from. I created a few flattering painterly portraits of this little boy today and then decided to try and get messy. I painted a hard black line around Desi and then decided to paint outside those lines a tad. Sometimes I focus so hard on making things pretty that I forget to loosen up and really throw some pixels around. I love this piece, and look forward to posting the rest of this guy's art soon.

The virginal origin of the world

Needless to say, this work by Tanja Ostojic is a reference to Courbet's Origin of the World:



Produced by the 25Peaces collective, it was supposed to be a promotion of Europe, and from what I understand, to participate in the campaign in favor of the European Constitution (in 2005, if I am not mistaken). As the image was posted on huge billboards, it was considered too radical and was taken off. And the Constitution lost the referendum.
But what is the actual message? Is it 'the origin of a new world'? It seems more like the beginning of something that can never be born. Instead of the origin, instead of the troubling, but real, thing, we get... panties with stars. Thank you very much. Where exactly is this Europe supposed to originate? Oh, and the retouched skin, the pure atmosphere of soap commercials and soft porn... It reminds me of Jeff Koons. And I'm not sure that's where I would like to see my Europe. Then again, I'm not sure Orlan's earlier variation on the Origin of the World motive would be convincing in a political debate:

Any other alternatives?

Tanja Ostojic's work was accused of misogyny. After writing the above words, I found a fascinating interview with the artist, who clearly states that the objective of the work was not to promote the EU ideals, etc., but it was created beforehand, namely as a comment on the EU's politics of (non)intergration. Now it makes sense. Ostojic actually seems quite upset about the context the work was shown in and the idiotic way it was treated by the Austrian media. Her site also made me discover another, impressive work by Ostojic: Looking For a Husband with an EU Passport (2003):



Wow. This hurts. I would call this a hard core artistic attitude. In that it doesn't have any problems with exploring what is too intimate to be shared. Nudity is a common, though not at all necessary element. It is really about exposure. Maybe, about making us feel uncomfortable. Do I like it? Is there any way one can like it?

(partly via)

Technorati: photography, erotic art, fine art, painting, art, contemporary art, vvoi

The object-driven touch: Robert Wechsler

What can we control?
What is the part of reality that is actually controllable?
Say, when we take things in our hands.

Applied Geometry (2004)

There is a point where reality simply will not be tampered with. It says only so much.
And the beautiful thing is when someone manages to feel this point and use it, changing the vectors, but keeping the power, the energy, the impulse that the world drives through us.
Does that sound esoteric?

Sanctuary (2005)

What is the fish doing in the church? What is the Holy water doing around the fish? Within the fish? It is all here, and the transgression is only a small part of the game. The name Sanctuary, to me, is not ironic. It is playful, yet strong.

Where do we go from here?

Zebra Print (2006) (H .75"x L 1.25")

Here?


Good work, Robert Wechsler.

(via)

Technorati: design, fine art, installation, art installation, photography, visual art, art, contemporary art, vvoi

Tommy in Black & White ... and Pink

Have not been blogging much this week ... trying to get caught up on orders. Here is a recent shot of My Scottie dog Big Tommy in a flower collar.

Please Light a Candle For Abby

Please light a candle for Miss Abby Louise tonight. She got her wings Thursday night and her humans miss her so much. This sweet girl is the mascot and inspiration for Linda O'Neill's Abby Creek Studios. Linda is a very talented artist that immortalized our own Atticus in oils after we lost him to cancer in 05. I know too well how hard it is to loose a pup that is such a muse and an inspiration not only in art but in life. Our hearts go out to Linda and James today.

Using walls (p.2): the Splasher controversy

There are several excellent Polish sites about art. They focus mainly on Polish art and the Polish contemporary art milieu, and have a certain tendency toward a specialized and a high-brow discourse, but they have lots of good discoveries and insights and are a great reference point. And they're in Polish, which makes me one lucky bastard. Lucky for most of you, they also have lots of images of new Polish works. I recommend two: art.blox.pl and strasznasztuka ('terrible art')
From time to time, they also put on things happening outside of Poland. Below is a translation of one of the articles:

"Splasher" is now the hottest street-art name in New-York. Not because of what he makes, but because of what he destroys. Stencils, stickers and posters on the streets of Brooklyn and Manhattan have been for over a month the objects of the attack of the anonymous 'vandal'. Street art created by people as famous as Banksy or Swoon are destroyed in the same way - by a cruel splash of color paint.

The street art works, once considered only as acts of vandalism, are now themselves victims of a vandal. But is Splasher really just a street hooligan? It seems not. He chooses his goals very carefully - they are always the works of known artists, who have also often entered into the regular gallery circuit, and their works are sold at auctions for big money.

The mysterious Splasher is being looked for on the internet. Bloggers are looking for the motive of his actions. Many believe Splasher simply protests against the commercialization of street-art and against putting it in the same pot with classic works of art.

But what are Splasher's actual motives? Next to many of the works there were manifestos glued to the wall (one of them is reproduced below). They have references to dadaism and expressions like 'True creativity is the joyful destruction of this [existing] hierarchy'. Is Splasher the conscience of contemporary street art? Or a conceptual artist, who as part of an adopted theory of 'destruction' creates a new work of art?

New Yorkers don't appreciate Splasher's "art". The destruction of the works of known artists, such as Banksy, results in disapproval, and even anger. Splasher is not seen as the "savior and renewer", but as a simple vandal. Vandal among vandals? Or could Splasher be the last real street artist, who sacrifices famous murals and stencils in the name of a fight for the purity of the art form? Because what is the difference between street art and gallery art, if we can't destroy someone else's work at will in either place? After all, street art is based on an idea of destroying and lawlessly occupying space. Always at the cost of someone else. After all, the street is not a museum - every street artist, even Banksy, is subject to the same rules and accept that his work can be removed at any moment.

The question remains - do Splaher's desperate gestures make sense? Is it better to fight for a pure street-art, or to cherish its highest achievements?

(text by strembol)

more on Splasher here
And here is the idea that Splasher is a marketing ploy by the very people who promote street art as a commercial art form - this way they get free publicity (with a street-art war twist to it, apparently?).
The very idea shows us something new: that these are real people, existing in a real society, and obeying its laws. Whether they are perpetrators or victims, they participate in a social context. And its a relief to see how clearly they are integrated in it through the Splasher affair.

Using walls (p.1)

Can emotions shape our morality? Not only they can, but according to the great Portuguese neuro-scientist António Damasio, they do. Damasio has recently published an article in Nature which further develops the idea that our moral choices are very closely related to our emotions - also on a neurological level.

Face2Face is a simple idea: make both sides of a conflict see each other in the most human way possible. Show faces. Show them up close. Show them together. Show them as similar and - make them look funny.
So, if emotions can shape our moral decisions, the laughter could make it just a little harder to see the other as barbaric - unknown, distant, too-different.

Can this work? Can it be that simple? And I don't mean to suggest peace will happen because of a few posters. But can anything change? And why would we not believe in it, other than out of bitter and failing experience?

Two small details. One: the use of a 28 mm macro lens. It is very hard not to look funny and cute seen from that angle. Two: the faces we see are combined in pairs of people with the same jobs (e.g. barbers, doctors, etc.).
See the video:

FACE 2 FACE trailer by JR and Marco
Uploaded by 28millimetres

Technorati: photography, art, contemporary art, vvoi