Uh-oh... Someone's come along and burst our bubble.

A friend recently told me about an art documentary they had seen on tv late last year, and urged me to watch it. 'The great contemporary art bubble', follows a guy called Ben Lewis, whose aim is to try and understand and figure out the reason behind the sudden boom in the contemporary art market, as well as the escalated price tags attached to so many contemporary art pieces recently, whilst the rest of the economy seems to suffer.

One of the first pieces of info you're hit with, is how much Andy Warhol's piece sold for... £33,000,000. That is just utterly, utterly insane. Think of all the good that could be done with that sort of money. It just makes you think all billionaires are mental. While the economy fell, contemporary art prices rose. Contemporary art has recently become mass produced, hitting 'new record prices'... Lewis found that during may 2008, banks had written off millions of pounds of bad debt, however, to Sotheby's (auction house), it' s as though the debt had never even existed! Sales were on the increase, not at a loss. Once prices are driven up, it creates a momentum that everyone wishes to get involved with. He found the likes of Damien Hirst and Jeff Koons's work, whether dead or alive, the prices continued to rise.

Art seems to have become a 21st century commodity, increasingly commercialised and the newest, hippest and most popular works are increasingly sought after. Risky and edgy art, like works completed by Tracey Emin and Damien Hirst are one of a kind, unique and controversial. People nowadays (well, I say people, what I meant was... millionaires/billionaires) have the capability and the means to collect iconic works. Gallery owners and dealers were being probed to escalate the prices and to fake bid on works of art to make sure they never fail to sell; after all... 'making money is art.'

We as fine art students are being gently prodded into becoming a part of this chain, but at what cost? We, as cravers of 'new art', are slowly deviating away from the notion of true, and truly fine art. It's nothing arty, it's just good business.
...Right? Well, I don't want to play my part!

'At particular times, a great deal of stupid people have a great deal of stupid money.' - Ben Lewis.

Keeping us on our toes.

It always seems at a point when the pressure is really on, something happens to bring everything into perspective, and rid you of all your trivial shit. Shit, that if not completed, would normally bring about the end of the world.
But instead, here I am. Sat in the garden begging the universe to make my mum well.

I can't draw or paint, I don't even want to. Everything just remains as it was, very... still.

A friend recently told me about the act of catharsis. After a quick peek on wikipedia and of course online dictionary, I found that it was defined by an act of cleansing, or more specifically - 'the purging of the emotions or relieving of emotional tensions, esp. through certain kinds of art, as tragedy or music.'

I thought about it for a while, but realised I was thinking far, far too much about it. My mood was dark, and my thoughts scattered. Which thinking about it, is maybe why everyone's work these days seem to be a scattered black mess. Why not paint a celebration, paint the end, when all this pain and confusion has left. Isn't that a better idea? What in god's name is the point of dwelling on it all? Dwelling and focusing your attention and energy on the bad things will only draw more negativity to you.

Having said that, I like the idea of an emotion release. I think even a bike ride would do it for me right now.
Jackson Pollock's work comes to mind now... crazy energy and sparks of colour.
Then again... look how he turned out.

Goya and the Chapman brothers.

I know what you're thinking... and yes, it is a very odd mix. I like comparisons, so hear me out...

Francisco Goya has long been considered one of the first to be labeled a modern artist. He favoured a very subjective element to his works and provided a pathway for the brilliance of painters such as Picasso and Manet. It would appear that Jake and Dinos Chapman; brothers who usually work exclusively with each other rely at times on artistic appropriation. Their work ‘Great deeds against the dead’ [1A] is an appropriation of one of Francisco Goya’s ‘Disaster of War’ etching prints. The series was Goya’s horrifyingly accurate portrayal of the horrors he had witnessed in the Peninsular war between Spain and France during 1808 - 1814. The work in question is a replication of ‘Plate 39: Grande hazaña! Con muertos!’ (A heroic feat! With dead men!) The graphic etchings were deemed too gory to be released during Goya’s lifetime, so were first published in 1863.


The work, which was originally their contribution to the ‘Sensation’ exhibition at the Royal Academy, was renamed ‘Great deeds against the dead’ (1994), and has been dubbed a ‘rectification’ of Goya’s earlier etches, and is overwhelmed with their own distinctive trade of somewhat pornographic surrealism. Goya’s use of art as provocation is what’s first thought to have sparked such a great and furiously obsessive interest from the Chapman’s; Jake Chapman has said, ‘Our work proceeds more by compulsion than by inspiration’. The Chapman’s, a much integral tool of Charles Sattchi’s Young British Artists movement, have long been known for their use of forceful shock tactics. The use of appropriation in this work can be judged from many angles; Goya’s works are a compelling anti-patriotic masterpiece that have been experienced not as a historic but a contemporary work of art; the images embody a sense of urgency and a demand to seek the truth. Goya’s works are ones that have never lost their power to shock. So much so, they were not published during his lifetime; not until 35 years after his death. Goya was one of the first to reveal and strip away the chivalry and idealism so apparent in earlier representations of war. He allowed succeeding generations of artists to witness war through his eyes, and as a result they have recognised in his disaster series a template for their own.


The Chapman’s incessant need to shock viewers with outrageous and often offensive works of art could be their goal, an audience in which they include themselves; the liberal, the humanist and the gallery going upper middle classes. According to the Chapman’s, Goya’s unflinching aesthetic was ahead of its time; they praised him as ‘the first modern artist to have psychological and political depth’. There are a number of reasons why these works differ and their meanings are so vastly different; the most obvious being the time in which they were completed. It is difficult to wrap our heads around the thought that during this point in time, a point when political correctness has literally gone mad, the Chapman brothers are no longer bound by the same restrictions Goya once was. If anything, they are allowed to test the waters and push the boundaries of contemporary art to a new level.

A breakthrough! Finally!

This may all amount to nothing (have to put a little negativity in there before I start, it's just my style!) but this morning I had a 'hallelujah' moment whilst talking to one of my friends. I was venting my frustration over not being able to place a 'meaning' to my work, and telling her of an Artist I'd found on a contemporary Art website called Derek Albeck. Here's one of his drawings/paintings...
I realise now, that your work in order to be recognized, should have a symbol, or more obviously, a meaning. Of course I've always known this... It's just insanely difficult for me to commit a meaning to my work. I get panicked in case I change my mind, or in case there isn't enough to go on... and so on.
But, I thought (only this morning, it's just like me to leave things completely to the last minute!) why not merge both of the avenues I was exploring into one. Using the idea of limits (time limits, and limits as to what I should draw) and also the idea of my work becoming autobiographical... Possibly exploring each year of my life through someone who influenced me during that year.

I have to admit, I'll be extremely hesitant to tell tutors about this, or explain in great detail, only because I really can't take another, 'But what does it mean?' interrogation.

Rise of Women Artists.

There was yet another trip to the Walker art gallery yesterday. This time to see the current exhibition, 'Rise of Women Artists.' The exhibition features works from art history's most celebrated and successful ladies. On show are works starting from as early as the 16th century up to today's more contemporary pieces.

The Artists featured that really stood out for me were Paula Rego and Aubrey Williams. I've always been a quiet fan of Rego's, so to see some of her earlier works in the flesh was quite exciting...
The exhibition was rather poignant, there were stories of tradgedy and courage behind so many of the works of art. I held a feeling of satisfaction and great-fullness after we'd left. From now on I will leave my opinions and stereotypes at the door... When creating art, gender and race should not play any part, we are all entitled to create whatever we see fit.

Beverly Bennett.

I forgot to blog about this lady... I recently saw her work at an exhibition at the Bluecoat in Liverpool. At the time, I didn't appreciate the work at all. It was only after walking away and coming home that it really had an impact on me. This is the sort of work that really baffles me, I can never decide if it's not enough, or just right. Say if I was to take this work to a review, what sort of reaction should I expect?

Well there's really only two options, there's either 'it needs work', or, my personal favourite... 'what does it mean?'

I've got to say, I love it. More than anything, I love the fact this lady probably just thought, 'you know what, I'm going to scrape a few lines into this paper, and while I'm here, stick a few pins in this card and stick it in the wall!' (insert any dialect here.. makes it more amusing!) I'd love it even more if that was the case. It could be about absolutely anything... the fragility of the paper could link with almost any global issue. The fragility of our nation... the fragilty of the global economy.

However, having read up about this exhibition, which is actually called, 'Action', linked with Sonia Boyce's 'Like Love - Parts one & two'; it turns out I am completely wrong... obviously! 'Action' is part of Bennett's MA degree, which was completed six months ago and forms the basis for her pieces; interacting with the medium of drawing using a mix of paper, pins and sharp scoring tools, which she describes as 'a sort of Hansel and Gretel approach'... Not really sure what that means! The fact it is mounted at eye level is to give extra impact; allowing you to come face to face with the pins. Bennett describes it as 'quite scary and violent', 'very alluring and delicate'. Boyce depicts Bennett's work as an avenue to explore concerns about the depictions of performative actions in art - 'Subtle artworks become evidence of her interaction with the medium of drawing, and then the audience becomes witness.'

... Yeah, now she's lost me.

Shepard Fairey and Barbara Kruger.

Here is yet another extract from an essay in the making! Another comparison, as you can tell... I like those. Here goes nothing...
Barbara Kruger’s works are highly recognisable and energetic; embodying a scattered juxtaposition of both words and images that have been appropriated from various forms of media and popular culture. The works are originally derived from her experience working as a designer, and are usually accusatory or declarative in their delivery and tone. Kruger is a conceptual artist whose pieces often include black and white photographs with bold red overlaid captions, usually featuring pronouns such as ‘we’, ‘I’, ‘you’, ‘they’ and ‘your’. Her main motif is the criticism of sexism and the circulation of power within cultures. Kruger’s 1981 piece, ‘Your comfort is my silence’ [1C] shows the placement of shapes blocking the man’s eyes which eliminates his identity and reduces him to a generic symbol of masculine dominance and control. Kruger keeps her bold statements somewhat cryptic, and forces the viewers to construct a meaning from their own previous experiences; therefore forcing them to actively participate in her work.
It is the works of Kruger, and old Soviet Union communist propaganda posters, such as the works of Alexander Rodchenko, that have paved the way for artists such as Shepard Fairey. Without this work, the birth of ‘Brand Obama’ would never have been born. Fairey has found his name with a carefully nurtured reputation as a mischievous street artist, most well known for his ‘Obey’ street posters and Obama ‘Hope’ print [1D]. Unlike Kruger, Fairey is more obvious in his message and has taken a more active role in the philosophies of commercial advertising and feels his work has a connection to companies culturally, and has said his work is ‘...designed to question conspicuous consumption’ [b]. As a result of this, on numerous occasions, Fairey has been accused of plagiarism. The re-use and appropriation of images in todays society has reached a crucial new level; the repetitive distortion of history could prove damaging to art, leaving the embedded political and social messages overlooked and therefore become meaningless. Kruger’s work rejects the majority and raises questions about gender equality, consumerism and stereotypes.

Kruger once said, ‘I had to figure out how to bring the world into my work’. Both artists use this type of appropriation as a focus; they pull from the works of others and the worlds they depict to create their own work. They both utilize historic images in order to interact with current global issues. Both artists, but mostly Fairey, and Kruger mainly by advertising, have been heavily influenced by history during their peak working years, however this does not mean they can provide us with an accurate critical assessment of whereabouts in the grand scheme of things we all stand. Simply, their attention is focused on current issues of that time. Even though the idea behind the works are similar; bringing issues to the forefront of our minds, it is Fairey’s Obama ‘Hope’ and ‘Progress’ prints that focus our attention on current political issues, whether that be in a global or local setting. The ‘Obama’ prints further support my argument; they do not suggest Fairey is a genius in the context of politics, it just goes to show that any artist, with passion and determination can attempt to provide us with a painting that makes us critically assess where we stand today.

Me and mine.

It's occurred to me that I haven't done the one thing I guess you'd expect from a blog. And that's... actually talk about my work. I find it difficult to write about, even on here, which I know only a handful of people will read (...if that!)
But talking and discussing it, whilst some good may come of it; new ideas may be generated and positive feedback may be given, it also opens the doors and paves the way for scrutiny, and judgement.
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm all for constructive criticism, but if I'm totally honest, I feel the amount of 'constructiveness' you get back all boils down to the amount of work you've done, and the mood your tutors in.
Alas, there's no good to come from moaning...

It seems there's no time to let your work take a natural progression and manifest naturally, because it's all got to be done in time for your reviews and tutorials... (this, is usually when I say hello to a big fail) I've never been good at explaining ANYTHING. How I'm feeling, even what I did yesterday! So for me, of all people, trying to explain what my work is about and what I want it to say, is a disaster waiting to happen.
If only there was a line in our handbooks that read, 'Let your work speak for itself'.

... But there isn't! so I'll just get on with it.


These are just a few examples of different avenues I was exploring. How to approach drawing the face. At first, I just drew from memory, different features, and just zoomed in on them. I used my friends as guinea pigs, obviously. That's that they're there for. I'm just trying to figure out what it is I want to reach, at what point will it be enough?
Am I trying to re-create these peoples personalities?
Am I? ... I just don't know!

At first, this work was about setting myself time limits. With drawing and painting, it takes me forever and a day to fully tune myself, and get into 'the zone'. It started with drawing random objects, setting myself limits from a few seconds to 15 minutes at the most. This, as most of my other work has in the past, eventually deviated towards people. Now, because I started with the idea of limits, its difficult to try and explain just what these faces actually mean. For me, they are a triumph. I'm a long way off from being a perfect portrait artist (far, far from it!) and usually, I find myself disappointed with a finished face. The fact that it's finished and has reached a conclusion and yet is not perfect... frustrates the hell out of me. It occurred to me that perhaps subconsciously, this work is autobiographical, and is setting the path for stories that I have yet to tell, and people I have yet to meet.

Now, isn't that interesting? a little cliffhanger for you there.

... But really, For me, work is a slow succession. Try to keep up!

Another naked place.

Living in Crosby makes it easy to take a stroll any time over to the beach to visit Antony Gormley's 'Another place'. It was not the best decision I've ever made, but I decided to brave the weather in order to pay them another visit a few days ago. There is something beautifully calm about being there, and you can't help but feel contemplative... Something I frequently crave!


Here is an extract from an essay I've written...

Antony Gormley, an internationally established sculptor and winner of the Turner prize, uses his body as a means of expression. In Gormley's work, the body almost becomes a shell; its purely a means for creating casts and iron moulds. In which Gormley then tries to communicate an idea;

‘Accept that we live in a world of the visible, but make it unsatisfactory enough that behind the visible is some kind of potential that does not exist in the sculpture, but exists in the viewer.’


Gormley expresses the understanding that he feels to a certain degree, his work is unsatisfactory; it is asking you to look for something in yourself that can empathize with the inner space of his work, of which is not an object, as such. He feels his sculptures and casts that represent the body do so as a condition, not as a given identity. In essence, he has striped the body of any personal identity, personality, and feelings it may have possessed or expressed; taking away any empathy felt by us, the viewers, to turn the body into nothing but a catalyst. Gormley replaces the surface structure of skin and hair with rough and coarse materials, making the bodies almost unidentifiable as a structure that would have once been recognisable as a living entity.
‘Another Place’, a sculpture of Gormley’s set across three kilometres of Crosby beach in Liverpool, is home to 100 life sized cast iron sculptures of Gormley’s body. They are displayed at different stages of rising out of the sand with all of them turned facing towards the sea; staring out at the horizon with a sense of hopeful expectation.


Like a lot of his other works, the ‘Another Place’ sculptures have been stripped of everything
personal; everything that would make them recognisable as a living entity; a personality, an expression, a soul; and this has been done purposely. They stand unclothed, a small shell of their real-life double, prone to a number of physical changes at the mercy of mother nature.
Due to its obvious ‘sense of place’ connotations, I feel the theme of identity has somewhat been shelved. I am not in any way questioning Gormley’s motives; yes, in part I believe it stands as a poetic response to the universal sentiments associated with emigration; the sadness of leaving a place behind, coupled with the hopefulness of a future in a new place. However, I feel I must ask, why 100 sculptures? Wouldn’t one sculpture still serve the same purpose? Perhaps Gormley felt his message wouldn’t be as strong with just one. I, however, feel if just one sculpture was made, the work may have adopted a whole new line of questioning; it would have sustained our focus and interest, put forward and questioned identity within a social context, not just to be focused upon the people here, but everywhere in the world. It would have focused on the past social identity of these people, seeking out new places to live. Why he didn’t feel the need to highlight both agendas within this work is anyone's guess...

I guess we'll never know!

David Barton.

One artist in particular who stood out at the zine fair was Mr David Barton. I quickly recognised him from the previous fair, as his pictures are highly energetic and beautifully executed in their simplicity. Here's a few below...


Sadly, there isn't much about him on the internet, besides this, a sort of personal statement, from the zine website:

'Working in the privacy and intense concentration of notebooks for many hours each day has always been important to me and in 1964-6 while studying with the late Anton Ehrenzweig, initially as a student at Goldsmiths, I began working under his guidance on what he called "Tease and Worry" books. These are notebooks in which ideas are tested and pursued relentlessly through drawings, paintings, texts etc; in order to identify, realize and understand a personal imagery through respect for the spontaneous interruptions offered by the creative process itself. This allows the development of an intuitive dialogue between the artist and the emerging content of the work in which the unconscious can stimulate the disclosure of otherwise ignored and suppressed insights and revelations.'

In my opinion, this man just exudes professionalism and pure loveliness. Its easily recognisable that he is 100% commited and focused on his practise. He spoke with such passion; I can only hope that one day I am as focused and (talented!) as he.
Knowing he worked in his studio almost 7 days a week, I asked if he ever got bored. He was pretty adamant that the time spent in his studio was certainly not wasted nor spent halfheartedly; he draws at least 200 pictures a day, totaling 1000 in a week. At first, I imagined he drew from a life model, or at the very least, photographs. But having listened to his conversations with others, he suggested he drew from 'life', which according to him, is changing shapes and continually expanding. I think its safe to say I met a real life slave to the cause that day.

Here's the website, if you want to take a look - http://www.zinefair.com/

Preston Zine and Artists bookfair.

About 3 months ago my friend asked if I'd like to take part in the preston zine and artists bookfair. Last year, a few of us took a trip up to leeds to visit an old tutor (and friend!) who had a stall at the zine fair, aswell as our old college, so naturally, I said yes.
It's always a treat to see beautifully hand-crafted works, you can just tell most of them are created with such passion... so any excuse to go is a good one!


anyway, here's us at our stall. With quite an eclectic mix if you ask me!

It really was a pleasure to take part in, and I even managed to find someone with as many paper cuts as myself!
What was most pleasing was the wide range of fine art styled pieces, to the vibrant graphic pieces. In a strange way, it was sort of humbling how there was no divide, and all the work was welcomed in one place.

Back to the grindstone.

It's been a lovely Christmas break. Going to be honest and say not enough work was completed... but everything will get done, it always does. I work most well under pressure, oddly, something to do with the panic spurring me on I guess...

Anyway... for a while now Lucian Freud has been one of my biggest inspirations when it comes to portraiture, the chunky paint and blank expressions are just music to my eyes. However, when it comes to me and my (amateur!) attempt at portraiture, I get too obsessed with how a face should look when I really should be hooked on my interpretation of it. I love colour exaggeration, but I can never execute it. There is something annoying about portraits that are so perfect you can never tell if its a painting or a photograph. Why not just save yourself the time and energy and just use a camera?!

... Perhaps they're just showing off their talent. Actually, thinking about it now I'd probably do exactly the same. If you've got it flaunt it right?!

Here are some pictures of Lucian Freud's portraiture:



I was recently flicking my way through a contemporary art website when I came across this next guy, Nick Lepard. While his work bores no great resemblance to Freud's, besides obviously the portraiture, and the chunky paint... it just reminded me of them. With a contemporary twist. Sort of like that feeling of coming home. This is what makes me comfortable, and this is what I like. They're not taken on overly flattering angles and there seems to be a great emphasis (in my head!) on movement and application.

Better get my dancing shoes on.