An Explosion in a Shingle Factory
This weekend was the 2010 Armory Show – a large exposition of contemporary art, most of which was painted/photographed/constructed in 2009 and 2010. Sadly, it paled in comparison to last year's. Compared to the dynamic neon pop-art paintings and visceral,organic sculptures of 2009, 2010 seemed safer and less willing to cross that line into “what the hell is that?” That's not to say I didn't enjoy it. As I had the foresight to bring a notepad and camera this year, I now have a small Flickr album devoted to my favorite pieces. Here's a few selections from those selections:

Click to enlarge
“Sublimate XXX” - Antony Gormley
Gormley's best known work is probably England's towering “Angel of the North”. At roughly six feet, “Sublimate XXX” is a tenth of the Angel's scale. The figure is composed of brushed steel and arranged so that the individual blocks seem to hover in midair. It is both imposing in the natural, industrial strength of composition while decaying in a manner suited to the digital world. There's a certain resemblance to a JPEG suffering from over-compression and littered with artifacts. Nothing is recognizable but the very essence of the figure, adding a certain inhuman dread to a distinctly human form.

Click to enlarge
“Hubris” - Ian Davis
This painting, with its grand scale caught by eye by way of the visual allusion to the space station design in Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. The little individuals on the bottom – lab coated scientists/engineers – are all either gawking at or cheering their invention. The scaffolding lines, abstracted into two dimensions, lend a vague occultist feeling to the enormous phallic object. In fact, the perspective of the entire painting struggles to retain itself in the medium. The hubris of the title is not just the object represented, but our endless attempts toward a perfect representation.

Click to enlarge
“Untitled (Because there is no escape...)” - Muntean/Rosenblum
This work is by far my favorite of the entire exhibition, although I'm not really sure why. The quote on the bottom reads “Because there is no escape from what does not exist” - a conflictingly hopeful and damning sentiment reflected in the rest of the painting. Everything shown is in visual conflict with itself and with the other elements of the painting. One of the two figures is facing the wrong way, although the girl's withdrawn resolution makes it as though the escalator is descending. It is descending as she faces upward, gaze fixed and illuminated, her face both ready and resigned. She is early adolescent, boyish and yet there is an unmistakable curve of developing breasts. Her posture is grossly unnatural, entranced and yet relaxed with weight tilted onto her left side. Every aspect of the painting speaks of conflict, but the conflict is in the details and the overall feel of the work is a calmness. There is no escape from the clash of parts because they render an untroubled whole.
How We Won the War
Today, take a quick tour of the Technology Wing of the War on Artistic Constraints Memorial Museum
Roy Lichtenstein wields the nigh-unstoppable Image Duplicator...

...while the Dead Boys pack the mighty Sonic Reducer.
The Junk Key
When I'm rushing on my run
Velvet Underground - Heroin (Demo)
And I feel just like Jesus' son
And I guess that I just don't know

Angry Youth Comix #2, Johnny Ryan
And I guess that I just don't know
The Gernsback Singularity
Like a vintage wine, the near future of the mid-1980s only grows finer with age.

Phantasia Press hardcover art. Artist unknown. Click for the king-size version.
Heart and Soul
I was raised by a trained fine artist – in the Old Country (well, Leningrad, which was built to resemble a cosmopolitan European city.) My mother learned and then taught painting and drafting at the arts university. I do not remember when she started taking me to museums. Much like reading, which I cannot remember learning (it feels like something I’ve always just been able to do,) there’s no First Museum Day in mind. I’ve been to the Hermitage repeatedly - I may have seen Michaelangelo’s David there, in fact. We moved to America when I was six years old, and by the time I was eight, I’m pretty sure I’d been taken to every major gallery in New York City. Sadly, I didn’t enjoy any of it; I had no patience for museums. I was bored almost immediately by anything without a narrative. I’d devour any book I could find, regardless of content, but standing there staring at enormous naked women or a seemingly random arrangement of multicolored splotches, I was bored out of my wits. In fact, the only intense emotion I can associate with this time is being scared shitless by either this or this Malevich painting. It felt like something out of a nightmare brought to life. Thinking back on it, maybe that was the experience that sowed the seeds for me: the unconscious realization that art could affect me, regardless of how pleasantly (or not.)
A little under twenty years alter, I am now pretending to be an adult. I pay rent and wear a tie and sip bourbon and assume I have developed my own taste in fine art. I go to the Met and the Museum of Art on a regular basis. The 2009 Armory Show (a living artist exhibit named after the original 1913 Armory Show, a coming-out party for modern art in New York) and the 2006 Outsider Art Fair are some are some of my fondest art-based memories. Sadly, for all the episodes of The Joy of Painting and abortive attempts at being art-schooled, my taste is not exactly refined. I go by my gut and my heart, which are more often than not triggered by sex, violence, pop-culture referentiality (or usually some combination thereof.) I can hold down a conversation with someone who knows what they’re talking about, but I am pretty damn ignorant regarding both history and technique. Paintings, like film and music (two other great passions of mine,) are produced by fairy dust and magic wands. I can observe someone paint or play the guitar or make a movie, but the step between the act and the finished product is a big question mark on the flow chart. By virtue of sloth, I’ve come to appreciate this fact – it’s nice to know there’s a little magic left in the world.
Anyway, let’s get to the meat. I wanted to show off a few artist I’ve found and really, really dig on. I subscribe to a couple of (often NSFW) art blogs (Right Some Good is my favorite.)

Interiores by Fernando Vicente.
Click for high-resolution version.
Fernando Vicente is a Spanish illustrator who created a set of paintings called Vanitas. The paintings feature somewhat stylized women in fashion-magazine poses, with sections cut away revealing textbook-quality anatomy. A friend of mine noted that Interiores (above) may also be referencing/borrowing from John Singer Sargent’s Portrait of Madame X. The mix of the scientific detachment of the anatomical sections with the sexual posturing of the models is what attracts me to this series. Unlike the fear of death associated with a zombie (the only figure I can think to associate with these women,) they are presented as healthy, if a bit pale, inside and out. There’s no decay, only the presentation of a healthy, working and, most importantly, sexually attractive body.
Click for high-resolution version.
Brian M. Viveros (link mildly NSFW, paintings NSFW,) explains himself as a “Surrealist fetish/mutilation” artist. I hate to go against how an artist describes himself, but that description severely limits what I see in him. His paintings almost exclusively feature elongated women with enormous features and cigarettes between their blood-red (and often bloody) lips. Often there is an aura of violence about them: military gear, bloody noses and boxing gloves all feature in his portraits. He makes it easy to cry “misogyny” and completely write him off. Naturally, the devil (or saint, in this case) is in the details. Take one of my (and by his constant publicization it, his) favorite paintings: EvilLast (above.) Her lip is bloody and her nose may be broken but the blood on her body and helmet is not hers, and there's plenty more of it. One can even assume there's plenty of it on the boxing gloves just out of frame. The power and femininity collide in the face: flawless eye shadow and a lively red rose framing a battered boxing helmet, the blood on her lips mixes with the lipstick. The neck, oversized, is clearly feminine but in no way frail. The look in the eyes isn't exhaustion or fear: it's a challenge. The look of victory on a battered face is one of Viveros' trademarks. From a personal perspective, these are paintings of empowerment. The mix of over-implied femininity and equal give and get of violence is a clear message: standing up in a fight does not enmasculate a woman.
I think that’s enough for today. I had a few more, but these two exemplify my adoration of anesthetized sex and violence. Next time: nostalgia.

