kitchen life # 50 ~ kicking butt

full sink ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenOnce again I find myself in a strange (but extremely comfortable) bed which is located approximately 130 miles from home. The bed is in an amazing country inn - a farmhouse which has been restored to very high level in the American Craftsman style. The wife and I are where we are because she has an early court appearance today so it made sense to get here last evening and be well rested this AM rather than getting up well before the crack of dawn and being somewhat frazzled after a long drive.

In any event, at breakfast this AM - prepared by the couple who own the place - I was chatting with the owner/husband (a really nice and interesting guy), the retired Athletic Director at nearby St. Lawrence University, and the subject turned to sports related stuff. Before he was the AD, he was the wrestling coach at SLU so I mentioned that I had had a rather successful high school wrestling career. Long story shot, he had coached several wrestlers at SLU who were from my high school and, consequently knew my HS coach quite well.

Small world. But it gets even smaller.

Again, long story short, I mentioned that I had recently seen my coach at my HS Athletic Hall of Fame induction event. I was inducted, not for wrestling, but for football - I was part of football team which went undefeated playing a schedule against some of the best teams throughout NY State. At that point he asked me "what year was that?" I answered, "1964." He replied, "Man, you guys really kicked our butts all over the field. I think the score was 22-0."

So, how small world is that? 50 years ago I was kicking this guy's butt all over the playing field and now I find myself sharing a breakfast table with him at his wonderful country inn. Life is strange.

civilized ku # 2689 / single women # 26 / picture windows # 62 / kitchen life # 49 ~ another useless artist

Another Useless Artist ~ New York, NY • click to embiggen
single women ~ New York, NY • click to embiggen

picture windows ~ New York, NY • click to embiggen

kitchen life ~ Au Sable Forks, NY • click to embiggenEven though I continue to be very productive picture making wise - 100+ new pictures in the last 30 days - I am feeling more than just a bit un-focused / aimless or, perhaps more accurately, plain and simple just flat out restless.

As evidenced by today's picture entries, in just the last week I have made additions to several of my bodies of work, including more which are not included here. And, it's worth noting that I am rather pleased with the work I have been adding to my various picture projects. I am even contemplating the start of yet another separate body of work which would begin completely from scratch.

Consequently, I can write with both conviction and certainty that I am not suffering from a picture maker's mental block, a deficiency of picture making motivation, or feelings of picture making inadequacy. No, not at all. After careful rumination and contemplation, there is no doubt in my mind that my current restless picture-related mental state does not stem from any of those picture making maladies.

Rather, I am quite certain that the bee in my bonnet, thorn in my side, idée fixe or monomania is instigated by the fact that I have not exhibited - gallery or art institution wise - any of my pictures for the better part of a year. Quite frankly, I don't find exhibition opportunities scarce or hard to come by. That is to write, when I set my mind to seeking them out. However, the truth of the matter is that I have been a slacker of sorts in that department.

I believe the reason for that situation is simple - most of my recent exhibits have been in not-for-profit art organization / institution galleries. Galleries which have funding which is not dependent upon selling something. Consequently, gallery goers who frequent those venues, generally speaking, are most interested in looking at rather than looking to acquire art.

Privately owned for-profit galleries are an entirely different matter. In order to exist, they need to sell something and in the process, make a profit. When the owner / director of such a place makes a decision to exhibit an artist, they do so with making a profit in mind - will the artwork appeal to and subsequently sell to their clientele? Which, in very real manner, makes getting one's work into a private gallery a real challenge.

Not only does an artist have to make interesting art but he/she must then find a gallery owner / director receptive to the work and who has a clientele receptive to the work and is willing to part with $$$$ to acquire it. Trying to win that trifecta is indeed a very daunting challenge.

All of that written, I want to exhibit my work in more privately owned galleries. That desire is fueled by my wish to sell pictures, but .... I want to sell pictures, not for the $$$$ (although I won't turn it down), but for the satisfaction of knowing there those who appreciate my work and are willing to part with something of value ($$$) to acquire something they consider to be of value, aka; one (or more) of my pictures.

So, it's time to make a plan*, get off my butt and implement that plan, and then sell some pictures.

*The biggest challenge I face in making a plan is to decide which of my bodies of work do I develop my plan around.

civilized ku # 2669-71 / kitchen life # 48 ~ oh woe is me

Blue Moon Cafe ~ Saranac Lake, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
art gallery door / entrance ~ Saranac Lake, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
vase, dried petals + candy cups ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen
frying pan reflection ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenIn the past on a number of occasions, I have written in defense of the artist statement. On the other hand, I have also written about my distaste, re: the academic lunatic fringe to include their artspeak fetish which exhibits itself in so many BFA/MFA artist statements.

Since those various writings, nothing to change my mind on the subjects has reared its head. However, recently there has been a surfeit of BFA/MFA fine art picture maker's artist statements - ones which read more like exercises in self-psychoanalytic therapy - that are starting to grate on my nerves. To paraphrase a sentence from a movie review, their (the picture makers in question) picturing endeavors track like therapeutic journeys (follow your dream of self-actualization) instead of transcendent excursions (just dream!).

In defense of artist statements I have, vehemently at times, rejected the dumbass idea that a picture which needs words is a failure. You know, a picture is worth a thousand words, but ... don't ever actually put any of those words down on paper cuz if you do, well, you know, then the picture is a failure.

However, IMO, if a picture is worth some number of words, then I want to hear/read them. And that holds true whether the words are about the picture maker's a priori motivations and/or intentions or the postmortem words of a critic re: the work itself. In both cases, even though I will have formed my own word thoughts by viewing the work, the words of the picture maker and a critic can and often does expand my appreciation and understanding of the work in question.

That written, it is my considered opinion that an artist statement should be both concise (employing an economy of artspeak-free words) and address the picture making process more than it does the psychologic analytical mental state of the picture maker.

To wit, if I am viewing a body of work comprised of hauntingly beautiful environmental pictures of elderly women, I would appreciate knowing that the picture maker is haunted by memories of his/her now deceased grandmother who raised him from his/her infant years after his/her birth parents fled the country after embezzling millions of dollars from a local charity, never to be seen again. However, while it might be true that such a picture maker has quite a number of personal issues to work through and even though making pictures may be one way to do so, I would nevertheless much prefer that she/he keep that stuff between her/him and a real therapist.

The motivation for the picture making endeavor is useful information in many ways, but the rest of the deep soul introspection, IMO, does little at best if anything to expand my appreciation for the work and is just a high-falutin' example of reality tv-like pandering to emotional voyeurism at the worst.

civilized ku # 2621 ~ at times clutter is good, other times not so much

Autumn sunlight ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenI'll give Nik0n credit for offering forth a digital camera without video capability. Hip, hip, hooray. However, while it took some balls to do so, I would also opine that those same balls disappeared into Nikon's collective lower body cavity when it came to the rest of the camera's design.

Yes, it has a traditional manual shutter speed on the top deck, the shutter release accepts a standard cable release, and, low and behold, it accepts virtually every legacy Nikkor lens ever made (I have 5) but ....

... unfortunately, the Nikon marketing mavens screwed up the rest of the camera. In the words of a dpreview review of the camera, "All things being equal, if you can add a function, why not do so?" To which the marketing wizards quite obviously replied, "OK. We will." The camera is digital-era function spec-ed out to the max.

So, instead of producing a mechanically simple picture making machine*, what they ended up with is a mish-mashup which just might put it in a betwixt and between place where it doesn't really satisfy either the crowd which wants a "retro" approach to making pictures - shutter speed, aperture, focus, and slam bam thank you ma'am - or the crowd which could care less about picture making simplicity and which never saw a function / feature they didn't like - the more, the better is their motto.

I was drawn into looking into the camera because of its ability to accept my older Nikkor glass. Fortunately, 2 items sent me scurrying in the opposite direction - 1) a clutter fuck UI (user interface) that is neither here nor there and for which you get to shell out 2) $2800.00USD (body only).

What were Nikon thinking and when are they (and, for that matter, virtually every other camera maker) going to tell the marketing department mavens to shut the fuck up and let a still picture maker be an integral part of designing a digital camera?

And, will someone pay that dpreview(er) person a visit, making sure he/she brings along a lobotomy kit?

*by one definition (mine), that would be a camera which doesn't require a 150+ page manual

diptych # 51 / kitchen life # 45 ~ and a postcard

Crafty camera ~ Phonicia, NY - in the Catskill PARK • click to embiggen
Splatters & spatters ~ Phonicia, NY - in the Catskill PARK • click to embiggen
Art studio / bedroom ~ Phonicia, NY - in the Catskill PARK • click to embiggen
Old hand colored postcard ~ Phonicia, NY - in the Catskill PARK • click to embiggenAnother weekend has passed and so has another getaway. This time it was a trip to the Catskill PARK - a down-state mini Adirondack PARK of sorts - and the village of Phonicia. The purpose of the trip was to attend a birthday party for one of the wife's brothers.

That purpose aside, one of the things I like about Phonicia is the fact that the village is art oriented - live theater, galleries, craft shops / boutiques and the like, not to mention several excellent small eateries and a classic diner. And add to those features the fact that there is a rather large contingent of past-their-prime hippies (lots of white hair, beards, and pot). Suffice it to state, it's a very mellow place to be.

When staying in Phonicia, the wife and I never know what our sleeping accommodations will be - a bedroom in main house, a tent in the backyard or the Magic House. On this visit we were surprised and quite pleased with a new option, the art studio - a detached art studio with a bedroom. A place I found to be a rather inspiring place to sleep and dream.

All of that written, there is no question, in my mind at least, that an art oriented community is an all together pleasant and somewhat inspiring place to be. And, I might add, a the wife's family get together without the 100˚ heat and 100% humidity of the South Jersey Shore is also quite enjoyable as well.

kitchen life # 44 ~ mid-day sunlight

Sunlight ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggen

civilized ku # 2561 ~ poetry / photography

Some of the stuff above the kitchen sink ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenFor those of you who have been following the progress of the nascent pictures + words project and might be wondering what the point of the endeavor might be, consider this:

Photography has many similarities with poetry. There's not a strong relationship between the disciplines, but there is a tight one between the sensibilities. ~ Larry Towell

That written, if poetry - or in our case, poetic verse - isn't your thing, and, if looking at pictures in the manner as described by Nathaniel Hawthorne is not your thing ...

Nobody, I think, ought to read poetry, or look at pictures or statues, who cannot find a great deal more in them than the poet or artist has actually expressed. Their highest merit is suggestiveness.

... or in the manner suggested by Ernst Haas ...

...one of the problems of photography, it tends to be a surface sort of thing if we are not careful ... take a picture and move on. Make a picture of what something looks like, but that's not at all what photography is. We have to learn to photograph not what it is but what else it is.

... then in all probability, pictures + words ain't your thing as well. Which, of course, is fine. Cindy and I are well aware that our project will not appeal / resonate with everyone. In fact, we realize that we are creating something which only a small segment of the picture viewing audience will "get" / appreciate, or, for that matter, even attempt to "get" / appreciate. Which, once again, is fine with us.

And, lest anyone think we are trying to be elitist / arrogant / effete artists, we are just operating under the assumption that, as Julian's grandmother used to say, "every pot has a lid".

kitchen life # 42 ~ neither fish nor fowl - my dilemma

Banana in sink ~ Au Sable Forks, NY - in the Adirondack Park • click to embiggenAs I have been aimfully google-ing around the web in search of enlightenment, re: rhopography, I came across Australian Joachim Froese's website whereon he has a page devoted to his Rhopography. IMO, his pictures are very nice.

That written, and much like the PR piece for the Frame of View pictures by David S. Allee (see diptych #25 ~ explanation entry, pt. 1), Joachim Froese's Rhopography Artist Statement could be lifted nearly whole cloth (if I were a plagiarist) and used as the artist statement for my decay and disgust body of work. The only change I would have to make would the words "black/white photography" inasmuch as my pictures are made in color.

However, again much like the Allee PR bit, while Joachim Froese's statement could be used to very accurately describe my decay and disgust work, I could not have written that statement without the help of an artspeak MFA academic.

That written, when I have talked with a couple curators, gallery directors, and general viewers regarding my decay and disgust pictures, I always mention my intent to: a)"reference 17th Century Flemish still life paintings" (which, I might add, were painted in color, not black and white) and b)make pictures which are "highly subjective constructions of, and reflections on, society" and its mores.

In most cases I do not need to tell viewers that I make pictures which "show a scenario that does not exist in reality" inasmuch as my pictures are quite obviously of 'constructed' scenes, arranged and constructed by me. However, if asked about the black border around my pictures (any of my pictures, not just my decay and disgust work), I do mention that the intent of the black border is twofold: 1)a throw back to an analogue tradition used as a deliberately employed signifer which implies that my pictures' "language stays strictly within the tradition of documentary photography that signifies truth" and 2)to create an ambiguity relative to the methodology of my picture making - is it digital? is it analogue? does it matter? Or, to put it in artspeakese, so that viewers might be "taken off-guard when deception is presented in as ‘old fashioned’ black/white photography print making gestures".

So, you might be wondering, other than providing you with a late-night sleeping aid, what's my point in all of this

Well, to put it succinctly, as I have been trolling about in what amounts to the tangential alternate reality universe of the academic lunatic fringe, I have come to the conclusion that my pictures, all of my pictures, fall into a somewhat no-mans-land, picture world wise.

That is to write, on the one hand there is the non-academic picturing world. A world populated by those for whom a picture is just a picture. Which is not to write that, for them, a picture can not reach them on a level beyond the visually obvious. However, when a picture does so, it is most often on a purely emotional level, not an intellectual one. And, if they were to hang a picture on their wall, it would so they could look at it, not think about it.

On the other hand, there is the MFA picture making crowd. A world populated by those for whom a picture is never just a picture (if it is just a picture, who cares?). For them, a picture is much more about serious picture making intent which is concept driven. While they might derive some visual pleasure looking at the pictures they make, they seem to enjoy much more, thinking, talking, and writing about them. If they were to hang a picture on their wall, it would be for it to serve as a device to instigate intellectual / academic discourse.

In a very simple nutshell, the difference between the two worlds is one believes, if a picture needs words, it is a 'failure'. The other believes, if a picture isn't accompanied by lots of words, the picture is just a picture and is, therefore, also a 'failure'. It would not be much of stretch to write that one group considers the other to be picture making simpletons, while the other group considers the other to be picture making pinheads.

Me? I kinda have one foot in one world and the other foot in the other world. I like pictures which are both visually interesting and intellectually stimulating. One quality without the other very rarely gets it done for me.

But therein is my dilemma - the non-academic crowd tends to ask, "why did you take a picture of that?", whereas the MFA crowd tends to ask, "why did you made a picture of that?" And, just to complicate things, the non-academic crowd wants an answer which is as simple and easy to understand as possible, whereas the MFA crowd wants a verbose answer which plums the depth and breadth of the history of the visual arts and all of the metaphysical / existential implications and associations thereof. It's enough to make me want to be a bullet in my head, metaphorically speaking of course.

Personally, artistically speaking wise, I find the one group to be (on the whole but not completely) rather shallow and the other (on the whole but not completely) rather tediously and annoyingly dense. I mean, seriously, to my eye and sensibilities, if someone's pictures are all visual flash and dash or, conversely, all conceptual flapdoodle, what's the point?

That asked, I guess for some the point is strutting your technical wizardry, while for others it's making sure the world knows you got yer book learin' money's worth. But for me, my picture making heroes will always be those who manage to make visually interesting (even challenging) pictures without employing pictorial excesses and whose pictures have meaningful meaning (even challengingly so) beyond the literal / visually obvious but without all of the de rigueur intellectual gymnastics and gyrations so beloved by the academic lunatic fringe.