Art Space Talk: Janet Fish

Janet Fish is a contemporary realist painter and printmaker. Janet is best known for her still life paintings that reflect aspects of her daily life. These paintings often contain still life objects from her collections of glassware and other objects-- objects that serve as a starting point for her painting. Her richly colored paintings and prints can be found in public and private art collections throughout the world. She has exhibited at several important venues-- including, the Metropolitan Museum of Art (NY), the Whitney Museum of American Art (NY), as well as the Art Institute of Chicago.

Janet's educational background is impressive-- she attended Skowhegan Summer School of Painting and Sculpture in Maine, and studied sculpture and printmaking at Smith College in Massachusetts-- she graduated from Smith College in 1960. Janet attended Yale University School of Art and Architecture, where she received her B.F.A. (Bachelor of Fine Arts) and M.F.A. (Master of Fine Arts) degrees in 1963. At Yale some of her classmates included Rackstraw Downes, Chuck Close, Brice Marden and Nancy Graves.

Plastic Boxes, oil on canvas, 50 x 70 in., 2007

Brian Sherwin: Janet, you are known for creating large still life paintings of common objects. You utilize bright colors-- yellow, lime green, pink...etc. You have stated that your work focuses on "forbidden subjects"-- realistic still life's. Can you go into further detail about this and why you view it as forbidden?

Janet Fish: Maybe this comment is a little out of context. More accurately-Some subjects are not fashionable, ie, sunsets, babies etc. unless, perhaps, given a polemical or ironic spin. .

BS: In a sense, your work is a reaction against pure abstraction. In regards to pure abstraction... what is your opinion of it? Why does it not work for you, so to speak?

JF: There is much I love and respect in it, but when I was looking for my own path I felt I needed something tangible, a way out of my head, a way to discover new things. No one had taught me to paint representationally so it was a way for me to explore without those other voices in my head. To look at things to find a way of expressing what is there. The right mark, the right color.

Spring Flowers, Orange Tray, oil on canvas, 48 x 60 in, 2007

BS: Your work contains some of the energy that can be found in Abstract Expressionism. For example, you utilize loose and linear brushstrokes with elements of abstraction. However, as mentioned, your subjects are recognizable-- such as cans of beers, crying children, and bags of junk food. Can you discuss this balance between realism and aspects of abstraction? Also, how do you decide the subjects that you capture?

JF: Light is my subject , the energy of light, the way color/light can bounce around the painting, the vitality of the surface mark, the way the structure of the painting can pull the eye . I am trying to pin down the energy that is around me. there are things I see around me that will start a painting going, the textures of things together, the way colors interact in a field. Sometimes my neighbors and friends, the way they are at an event. The fact of the subject, that it is a dish, a party, or whatever, that is not the real subject, that is what gets the painting going.

BS: Janet, let us discuss your early years. Your grandfather, Clark Voorhees, was an American Impressionist. How did your grandfather influence you during your early years? I understand that your parents were artists as well? How did they influence and support you?

JF: I never knew my grandfather but his paintings were around. My Mother and Uncle were sculptors. My parents friends were artists. It was the environment I grew up in and played in. I loved making things, it was osmosis. I still love the making of something.

Nan's Kitchen, oil on canvas, 60 x 60 in., 2004

BS: You studied sculpture and printmaking with Leonard Baskin at Smith College. At what point did you move away from sculpture for painting? How did your experience as a sculptor help you as a painter?

JF: I had always wanted to be a sculptor , but when I got to Yale I found the sculpture department very Bauhaus and too restrictive for me so I began painting- something I knew nothing about and could freely explore.

BS: Janet, you were one of the first women artists to receive an MFA from
Yale University. Can you recall that experience?

JF: There were many others besides me. But it was before the woman's liberation movement , at that time we were tolerated, not really respected. When we left Yale there were no jobs - good jobs for us and not much opportunity to show. Though things have changed, even now I think we see through male eyes. Words that are used in art criticism, Tough, cutting edge- these are boy words.

BS: In 1971 you had your first solo exhibit. Your work sold out before the opening. Can you recall how you felt at that time? Were you shocked?

JF: I was in a couple of COOP galleries , 55 Mercer Street and Ours, before I got in to a commercial gallery. I had been working for quite a while on my own, so in a way I was ready to exhibit also. The show at kornblee had good press. Nothing happened suddenly. It was years before I could live off my paintings.

Balloons, oil on canvas, 50 x 100 in., 1999

BS: Janet, your art has been exhibited at several prestigious spaces-- The Whitney Museum of American Art, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Brooklyn Museum-- upon reflection... did you know during your early years that your work would become so successful? Did you have a 'gut' feeling, so to speak?

JF: No I did not. The artists I grew up around were not famous. It was a way of life, a vocation. that success came along was a surprise and not expected. But I did want to be a good artist - as I defined it.

BS: Janet, what concerns you about the state of the art world at this time? As you know, the current art market is booming and there is a fear that it may crash at any time. Is this a concern for you? What other concerns do you have
about the art world?

JF: Actually, since I have been working it has crashed a couple of times. With every recession. Some artists have had stunningly successful careers non-stop, but I have seen others rise fast and fall hard. I think it is important to do what you believe in and ignore the critics.

Geese in Flight, oil on canvas, 60 x 60 in., 1979

BS: Janet, do you have any advice for emerging artists?

JF: Play with fashion if you wish, but don't be a slave to it - it can change and leave you behind. Also it is freeing to have another way of making a living so you are not dependent on the market.
BS: Are you involved with any upcoming exhibits?

JF: A show currently at Mount Holyoke that will travel to Manchester Vermont and a Show at D.C. Moore in 2009 that will travel to Pensacola Florisa.

BS: Finally, is there anything else you would like to say about your art or the art world?

JF: I love to see what others are doing and have done- it is a conversation. A really good show is energizing.

You can learn more about Janet Fish by visiting the following website-- www.dcmooregallery.com. You can read more of my interviews by visiting the following page-- www.myartspace.com/interviews.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

My Art Advice: My art does not seem to be noticed much online... how can I improve my presence?

"My art does not seem to be noticed much online... how can I improve my presence?"

This is a common question and one that I've covered before with past answers. I will discuss this issue again since it is a common question and concern for artists utilizing the Internet for exposure. It is simple really... if you want exposure online for your art you must have traffic and in order to get traffic you must get your name and links to your work seen! You can't simply create an account on an art site and hope for the site to do all the work for you. True, having your work on any site will bring visitors to your art, but you need to do some work yourself in order to maximize that traffic.You need to have your name and links to your art on as many sites as possible.

Here are some suggestions on how to improve your online presence:

1. Post links to your art! Include a link to the art site(s) that you are using on every profile that you have-- every site that you are involved with. For example, if you have a profile on www.myspace.com or www.facebook.com make sure to include links to the sites where your artwork can be found. Thus, if you have an account on www.myartspace.com be sure to include that link on other sites. You will also want to include a link to your art on ever post that you make. You can even use html code in order to place something like 'View My Art Here' on your profiles so that people will click on 'View My Art Here' in order to be taken to your www.myartspace.com account.


I'll use my myartspace url as an example:



a href= "http://www.myartspace.com/balhatain" > my art < a


When doing this you will want to type '<' before the first a and '>' after the last 'a' or it will not work. ALSO, I had to place spaces in several places... if you type it with your url the only space you will want is here-- 'a href'. In order to show how to do it I had to remove '<' and '>' and make the spaces between the other text or else it would have shown up like the example below... which is what you want if you do it.


my art


If you do it correctly it should work like the example above. This comes in handy because it will make your url active on the majority of forums and blogs that you might visit online. If you make a post on a forum right now with your link included someone searching the forum years from now may end up finding your post and clicking on the link. I've been contacted by people who observed links to my art on sites that I've not been involved with for over eight years! This is why it is important to get your name and any links to your art posted as much as possible. Think of it as a paper trail that leads to you and your current body of work.

2. Build multiple online networks! Build networks on sites like Myspace and Facebook. By building networks on several sites you will be able to use each of those sites as a vehicle for your art. Most of these sites will allow you to send links to your art out to several people at once through bulletins or posts. Take advantage of that!

3. Write about your art! Use a service like www.blogger.com or www.livejournal.com in order to create a blog/journal about your art. Post entries about your art, exhibits that you will be involved with, and your thoughts about the direction of your work-- include links to your artwork on every entry that you make be it a comment to another user or a journal entry about what you ate last night. Do the same on any art site that you are involved with if they offer blogs or journals.

You don't have to write about yourself. Anything you mention in an entry can help improve your placement in search engines. If you associate yourself with a specific artist, style, or movement be sure to write about that. By doing that your name may show up on searches for those respected influences on search engines like Google. By including your name and links to your art on these entries you will greatly improve your search placement. In other words, each entry will help improve your online presence.

4. Alternative press is a good thing-- Seek it! Seek out art zines that may feature your work online. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of these to discover-- and don't dismiss art blogs! As you can tell by my interviews(www.myartspace.com/interviews) artists from all walks of life and stages of career have found value in what bloggers, such as myself, can provide as far as exposure is concerned. I've interviewed artists who are virtually unknown and artists who have had their work sell for over a million dollars at auction. These artists may not share artistic direction or financial status, but they all share an acknowledgment of what online exposure can accomplish and a desire for the recognition that the Internet can provide.

Many art bloggers will be more than happy to make a post about your art if you contact them. Sure, you may desire to be covered by a major art magazine... but until that day comes-- if it comes --the art blogsphere is the next best thing-- if not the best! An art blog article, review, or interview can bring a continuous flow of traffic to your website for years to come if you include links to your art. In other words, an article about your art on an art blog will most likely be viewed by more people than an article about your art in a magazine. Recognition is just a few clicks away! The times have changed.

5. Combine efforts, work together! Forming an alliance of sorts with like-minded artists can benefit you greatly as far as online exposure is concerned. If you admire the art of your friends be sure to include a link to their work on your profiles and make sure that they do the same. Working together you may decide to create a profile, blog, or website that represents all of the artists involved in the group. A page that includes links to each respected members art is of great value-- especially if each member includes that link along with their personal art links when posting on the sites they are involved with.

Art groups have popped up all over the net alongside self-declared art movements. Artists unified under a common goal-- in many cases exposure for each member --have worked with great success on auction sites and other online resources. There are other benefits to a union like this... for example, if you are unable to find time to get online you will know that your name is still being spread by your friends. Gaining exposure online can sometimes be a battle... it may very well be a fight that is best not fought alone.

6. Find the time to promote your art online! Many say that the Internet is an addiction best left avoided. However, if you want to gain exposure for you art-- both online and offline --you really need to find enough time to promote yourself. Spend some time each day posting links to your art, uploading images of your art, commenting on the work of others and building networks on the sites you are involved with. A half hour of concentrated promotion of your art each day will really pay off as the years go by. After-all, you can't build your online presence if you are offline.

7. Avoid throwing money away on 'how-to' art marketing books! Don't waste your time and money on 'how-to' books that are focused on gaining exposure for your art online. I'm sure there might be some that are worth your time and cash, but I've yet to find any. That money is better spent elsewhere for your online marketing/exposure efforts-- website construction or a premium account on www.myartspace.com for example. I've mentioned this before and have received some delightfully angry responses from authors of these types of books. Why do I say to avoid them? Because they are often over-priced for the information they contain-- information that is often not current with the times and that contains 'helpful' links that are no longer active... which is not very helpful at all-- especially when a $19.95 price-tag is involved!

I say this because if you do a Yahoo or Google search for 'art marketing advice' or 'gaining exposure for your art online' you will most likely discover everything mentioned in these books and more-- for free. True, those books may contain personal experiences that the author has had researching (note, researching) online marketing and exposure tactics, but more often than not you will discover that the author is not an artist and therefore has not had any direct experience marketing or gaining exposure for art online. Many of these books are also written by authors who have a business motive hidden within the pages of their book-- their $100+ per month art consultant service which is often times mentioned in one of the final chapters or pages. This is why I take a hard stance against these books and in many cases their authors-- and before you say that I have a motive note that I make it very clear that I write for www.myartspace.com. Also note that you did not have to pay $19.95 to discover that fact.

You would be better off researching online art marketing and exposure on your own, discussing marketing and exposure tactics with other artists that you meet online, creating free accounts on every art site that offers free membership, creating a blog or two about your art, using social networking sites to build a network, posting links to your art on art forums, and if you must invest money, invest it in a personal website or paid-membership on an art site that you deem worthy of your hard earned bucks.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin
www.myartspace.com/balhatain
www.myartspace.com/interviews
www.myartspace.com/blog
www.myartspace.com

Art Space Talk: Bernard Friendlich

Bernard Friendlich-- a veteran of WWII --has dedicated himself to his art for over seven decades. During that time he has focused on revealing the horror of war and the plight of social injustice through his art. Bernard describes his body of work over the last seven decades as "poetic realism". Bernard celebrated his 90th birthday in March of this year-- he continues to create art and explore new mediums. I would like to personally thank Bernard's daughter, Valerie Rush, for her assistance during this interview and for introducing me to his art.

Bernard with painting of FDR

Brian Sherwin: Bernard, you lived through the height of the Great Depression, several wars and conflicts, you've seen the best of society and the worst... what are your thoughts when you look back on those times and to the art that you have created during a span of over 70 years? Also, can you tell us about some of your early influences in art?

Bernard Friendlich: Beginning in my early teens, I witnessed evictions of my friends’ families due to loss of jobs. I also had an adored aunt who expressed strong political criticisms of President Hoover and great admiration for President Franklin Roosevelt. And so my early sketches of kids playing ball or mothers wheeling their babies in carriages eventually began to expand to include men constructing nearby buildings and others just trying to make a living and feed their families as my own social awareness matured.

Some years later, I read a magazine which introduced me to the "Ashcan" school of art. The unemployed artists had enlisted in Roosevelt ’s Workers Project Administration (WPA), where they had the freedom to depict realistic scenes of life. Not all of them were fine artists, yet they had a profound influence on the direction my art would take.

Holocaust by Bernard Friendlich

BS: According to your biography, as a young man, you had to turn down an art scholarship for financial reasons, and went instead into textile design, which limited your artistic scope. Can you tell our readers about those years and the choices you had to make in order to pursue your art?

BF: After graduating high school, I had to give up my art scholarship to Long Island University , in order to contribute to our family’s income. I was fortunate to find work in a commercial art studio, doing textile design. The salary of $75 per week was unusually high for the time and for my age, but I eventually realized that I was expected to bring in original designs by working every weekend at home. I soon found that all the studios in New York were the same.

Although I was very flattered at age seventeen to find my textile designs in such high demand, I began to realize, speaking to other artists, that I would never have time to pursue my own art. Thus, after three years in commercial art, I quit. Through family connections, I got a job and training as a marker-cutter in the men’s garment industry.

As a member of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers Union , I had a livable wage, security from lay-offs, and best of all, a hard-won 35-hour work week. The latter meant that I could get home by 5 pm, and had the time I needed to paint and sculpt. I worked in the garment industry as a cutter for nearly 40 years.

BS: Eventually, your young life was halted-- as many were --by a world war. During WWII you were drafted into the army. Are you able to talk about those years and how they influenced your artistic direction? In what way did you serve? How long? Did the war change your view of the world and of life? Did you continue to create art during the war years?

BF: Drafted into the army in 1943, I was sent first to England , and assigned as regimental camoufleur. In my free time, I painted small watercolors of the English countryside—scenes of pub life, thatched roof homes, and townspeople. Close to 100 paintings emerged from the small watercolor kit that went everywhere with me. Unfortunately, after we left England for France , many soldiers’ duffel bags were tossed from the trains by Frenchmen scrounging for canned goods and soap. Mine was among them. The few paintings I had sent home to my mother are all that survived from that period—I think some of them are in my gallery on the website.

After D-Day, I was reassigned to the Combat Engineers. The work was hard but fortunately, I neither killed nor saw much death, although the devastation of war surrounded me. After V-E Day, I was sent with a certain number of officers back to Germany for another year, as part of the decentralization of Germany into the four zones of US, Russian, English and French control. I returned home in 1946, feeling fortunate to have made it home safely, but I brought much of my hatred for war back with me.

BS: Did you find it difficult returning to the life you once had after the war? Did your art help you to make that transition?

BF: Returning to civilian life for both my brother and I was among the happiest moments of our lives—he to his wife, and me to meeting my future wife soon thereafter. She had just been discharged from the Women’s Army Corps, where she served in an army psychiatric hospital. We met through friends and discovered a compatibility in ideas and cultural interests that formed the foundation of our long and happy marriage. We recently celebrated our 61st wedding anniversary. She has made it possible for me to pursue my art without interruption—except for the great pleasure of fatherhood. We have two daughters and three granddaughters, all of them creative in their own unique ways.

Hiroshima -- Theme and Variations by Bernard Friendlich

BS: I've known many vets of WWII through the years-- my grandfather fought in several major battles during the war and I can remember his old war buddies visiting him when I was child --and they always seem to be marked by a degree of inner sadness-- I think soldiers in any war endure that. I understand that the holocaust and the loss of life at Hiroshima and Nagasaki affected you greatly. You eventually created paintings and sculptures that serve as a form of reminder of that specific loss of life. Would you say that you want your art to remind future generations not to allow the same mistakes? What is your message to the future? In giving that message do you find joy or hope?

BF: I have always been greatly affected by human suffering, especially when it is caused by callous greed and irreverence towards life. I believe that war has always been the greatest scourge of mankind and has often needed subterfuge and lies as well as false appeals to patriotism and religious fervor, to gain popular acceptance.

To depict aspects of the Holocaust was almost impossible for me, because the photographic images and documentaries were so vivid and compelling that a painting seemed too little and too late. I delayed attempting it for many years, but I finally overcame my reluctance.

As for Hiroshima and Nagasaki , I knew only a sculpture could begin to memorialize the horror of that event. This large sculpture of 350 lbs. was exhibited in the lobby of the Huntington Film Centre for three years, during the showing of "Black Rain," a Japanese film, the first ever allowed into this country depicting the physical condition of the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki , and the fear and discrimination they faced. Whether people were fearful, ashamed or guilty, we never knew, but the sculpture never elicited the kind of responses we had hoped for. But there is a time for everything, and perhaps now is the time to face reality – and the past.

Future Mutation by Bernard Friendlich

BS: At 90 years of age, you are still painting, sculpting, and you enjoy a good game of chess. You hope to gain public exposure for your work. After communicating with your daughter I found out that you have had little opportunity to make the kinds of contacts, or finances, that a gallery showing would entail. I recently contacted a friend of mine who is an art curator at a war museum. I mentioned your art and we shall see how that goes. Would you be interested in an exhibit like that?

BF: Certainly I would like to have my art exhibited in such a setting, but I wish to be viewed not only as an anti-war artist, but as one who exposes the false illusions that afflict humankind.

Is it War? by Bernard Friendlich

BS: What have you been working on lately? Can you tell us about some of your recent creations?

BF: Over the past ten years, I’ve done some experimenting with mango pits, or kernels, making "talking heads" to express reflections on our times. Some are animals, tropical fish and birds, but many are people of all stripes. Some reflect humor and some social satire. They have been fun to do – they’re a kind of playtime for me.

More recently, last winter, I painted seven large oils depicting the effect of cruel policies on people’s lives. I hope to get their images uploaded to the website soon, but be forewarned --- they are not pretty scenes!

Mango Monkeys by Bernard Friendlich

BS: Finally, is there anything else you would like to say about the life you have lived and your devotion to art?

BF: Well, I intend to continue creating new works of art for as long as I am able, as there is still much to say about this world of ours, and I hope to be able to influence youth to appreciate serious art. Thank you.

You can learn more about Bernard Friendlich by visiting his myartspace page--www.myartspace.com/bernardfriendlich. You can read more of my interviews by visiting the following page-- www.myartspace.com/interviews.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Art Space Opinions: 'The Question of Intentionality, an Investigation' by Carson Collins

The whole notion of intent is one that fascinates me almost to the point of obsession; when looking at or making artwork I always wonder, what is the artist's intent for this thing that they are making?; what effect, exactly, is it supposed by the artist to have on others? What effect does making it have on the artist? and so on. This question of intentionality is strangely absent from most of what is considered critical thinking about Art. Quite possibly the various art objects could even be more meaningfully classified according to their different intentions and effects, but somehow this is never done.

It can be quite enlightening to try and arrive at a more specific sort of clarity about what our intentions for, and suppositions about, the specific things that we create actually are. Not in the sense of why do artists make Art and what is the purpose of Art?, but rather what are my intentions for this specific thing that I have made, and what effect do I suppose that it will have on others?

My personal opinion is that ambiguity is an essential quality of all really great Art. I'm not taking the position that one should read words like "intent", "understanding", and "meaning" as if any piece of visual Art shouldn't be just Art for Art's sake, as opposed to Art with a message. As regards the intentionality vs. ambiguity question, my thesis is not contra ars gratia artis; rather, I'm saying that, on close examination, artists actually do have purposes and goals for these things that they make (whether they're capable of articulating and/or admitting them or not), and these things that they make are worthy of being examined in terms of the artist's own intentions.

"An unexamined life is not worth living." - Socrates

Here's to plain speaking and clear understanding:

intent

Law:

the state of a person's mind that directs his or her actions toward a specific object.
Adjective:

1.firmly or steadfastly fixed or directed. 2.having the attention sharply focused or fixed on something. 3.determined or resolved; having the mind or will fixed on some goal. 4.earnest; intense.

- The American Heritage Dictionary

(A propos: P.D. Ouspensky, and others, would argue that most of us only imagine that we have intent.)

It strikes me that Art making may be the only organized human activity in which a lack of purposes or goals is considered by anyone to be a virtue. Why is this important? Well, for example, try to imagine a major business, charitable, or government organization with no stated purpose or "core values". No such thing exists. There's a reason for that: an organization so completely rudderless wouldn't survive for 15 minutes in the real world.

Recently I have initiated some discussions on the topic of "The Question of Intentionality" in a few artists' forums on the Internet. The Surrealists, as a group, are the ones that get the most upset at the very notion that artists (like everyone else) exhibit goal-directed behaviour. Here are some typical responses:

"Sorry, don't have time to think, I just paint because I like it. Don't want to know the reasons, I prefer mystery, as an open space for imagination."

"...a drawing with the intention of creating images without having any intentions about what those images will be... the intention to create something unintentionally..."

Certainly one can do this; Surrealists, in particular, often do. Nothing wrong with that. However this only brings up other questions of intentionality, as if one were peeling an onion. First, one might ask, what was the artist's motive (intent) for wanting to "create something unintentionally" in the first place? What result, exactly, did the artist hope to achieve via this method?

"...to connect with deeper psychological and emotional levels."

And then, what is the purpose of that? Self-knowledge? If so, then why show it to anyone else? Because if one makes something with the intent to show it to other people, it seems that there is implied an intent on the part of the artist to produce some effect on the viewer. Artists working within the Abstract paradigm tended to have a different set of objections to the notion of artwork being intentional. Here's a particularly articulate example:

"...a reason for someone to dabble in the the arts has been called an addiction and the reason they do it (some artists) is to seek a particular state of being (mind) while in this process of mark making. This is the primary motive or intention of some artists and by using this method it may have been achieved, or not. The actual image, or images, created evolved as an accident. There was no intent to draw, let's say, eyeballs but when the artist steps back and takes a look all she sees are eyeballs staring back at her.

The artist can't decide whether to show anyone her art... Eventually... she decides to show it to her mom. No matter what the artist does... her mom always says after looking at the daughter's marks, "That's nice dear, but why so many nipples." ...Curiously the observer of the art sees images that are different than what the artist sees. There was no intention to create eyes nor was there any intention to create nipples. After a while the artist gets up enough nerve and shows her work to many people. Each individual sees something different in this abstract piece of art. It appears that each viewer interprets the drawing differently. Perhaps that is another of the artist's intent, a secondary intent to create mystery and the result was that she succeeded.

Bottom line, there was no intention to create eyes, nipples or toes or whatever one might see. The intent was to create ambiguity. Each viewer was allowed to interpret the marks without being told what they should see. The drawing becomes a sort of mirror and reflects back more about the viewer than the artist. Abstract art is curious in this way and perhaps why it leaves many people baffled as to the artist's intent. They want to see the artist's intentions, they want to know what it means. Are they being put-on? They may feel that way but few artists apply their art just to make fools of people, maybe."

That's a chain of events that I find plausible, although I also find it disturbing. Not the part about the artist's intention to "seek a particular state of being (mind) while in this process of mark making." - that's something that I'm intimately aware of, and it's certainly one of a multiplicity of intentions that I ascribe to myself. What disturbs me about this hypothetical anecdote is that it seems to imply that important Art can somehow be made by accident, or, even more disturbingly, that the critic's rationalization after the fact is somehow more important than the artist's original act.

This was precisely the initial point of contention, reflecting back to a seminal conversation that I had with David Cohen in the September, 2003 issue of Art Critical. Assigning meaning or value to such an object beyond the intentions of its maker seems to me a rather questionable idea.

"...If a herd of pigs knocked over a table of paints and smeared a canvas, and you liked it, then you'd have to call it art..."

We do often find beauty or significance in the chance arrangement of things, whether done by an artist or an accident; an historical accident, in the case of some museum pieces. And, as Carl Jung pointed out with his concept of Synchronicity, this is far from trivial - it tells us something important about ourselves (and nothing in particular about the object).

"...do you think people need to know what your intentions are to understand your paintings? Do you not think something is lost by explaining it? If they don't get it without it being explained to them, have you failed?"

I don't think there's anything to "understand"; I'm more interested in having the viewer experience a certain state of mind, of emotion, a profound and lucid calm. If they don't experience that state when looking at my paintings, I don't think there's anything to be gained by "explaining" my intentions; insofar as that particular viewer is concerned, my work has failed utterly.

To quote David Cohen, "...I wouldn't want to participate in a criticism the function of which would be to award brownie points for good intentions."

One's paintings might work for some people and not for most people, regardless of any intentions. The fact that some viewers understand and appreciate and others do not has absolutely nothing to do with the question of intentionality. Intentionality is about one's own purposes and goals, not about the reactions of others. An artist of a mystical/Symbolist bent had this to say:

"...consciousness reflects reality, thus if you alter consciousness, you alter reality... Intent is simply a concentrated, intense energy that we apply --to whatever. As bodies of energy ourselves, we certainly can manifest many things. It is the same with prayer, per se, or meditation. It's all energy."

And a very pragmatic artist shared this point of view:

"...Intent has to do more with Preparation. Even Improvisation requires some sort of preparation. Spontaneity requires also preparation. The very ability to approach a blank page, a blank canvas or a computer screen is contingent on our inner preparations... contingent on the alignment of our heart, mind, and hands... in the direction of the task."

In conclusion, here is an interesting area of thought: the historical relationship between Art and ceremonial magick. Arguably this may have been the original (prehistorical) reason for the invention of representational Art. Perhaps Art is something that exists in a realm beyond intentionality, more akin to instinct. It seems to me that the impulse to make Art is both necessary and inevitable, an inextricable part of human nature.

I refer again to P. D. Ouspensky:

"Man is a machine, but a very peculiar machine which, in the right circumstances, and with the right treatment, can know that he is a machine, and, having fully realized this, he may find ways to cease to be a machine. First of all, what man must know is that he is not one; he is many. He has not one permanent and unchangeable "I" or Ego. He is always different. One moment he is one, another moment he is another, the third moment he is a third, and so on, almost without an end... In reality there is no oneness in man and there is no controlling center, no permanent "I" or Ego. Every thought, every feeling, every sensation, every desire, every like and dislike is an "I". These "I's" are not connected and are not co-ordinated in any way. Each of them depends on the change in external circumstances..."

(from "The Psychology of Man's Possible Evolution", Chapter 1)

Finally, it occurrs to me that Intent plays no role in "evolution" as defined by Charles Darwin; evolution is the result of environmental factors acting on random mutations. In other words, blind chance. Does Art "evolve" in an analogous manner? Or is it, more properly, the intentional product of work done by sentient beings?

Heartfelt thanks to all of the thoughtful artists who have taken the time to participate in my ongoing investigation of the Question of Intentionality, and to David Cohen, art critic for the New York Sun, who started me down this path back in 2003. I sincerely hope that readers of this essay will contribute their thoughts to my investigation.

Links of Interest:

www.artcritical.com/DavidCohen/CollinsCohen_exchange.htm
http://www.theoceanseries.com/
www.myartspace.com/carsoncollins

Art Space Law: Ripped and Altered? What You Need to Know.

I am pleased to introduce the second installment of Art Space Law. Gary Schuster, an attorney with Jacobowitz & Gubits, LLP (Walden , New York), has once again offered his time and knowledge to answer a question involving art law and the Internet.

Brian Sherwin: Gary , artists are often concerned about people 'stealing' or 'ripping' their art online. The main concern is that someone will still a digital image of an original work and alter it with a program in order to call the altered work their own. The rumor mill tends to turn... which leads to debate over what percentage of a digital image of an original work must be altered before it is considered an original work of art-- some people say 35%, others 75%... %'s get thrown about with no sources to back them. My question... is it true that an image, a jpg of one of my paintings for example, can be considered an original work of art if a specific percent of the jpg image of my original painting is altered digitally by someone using a program like photoshop? This is a HUGE concern for artists who display their work online. I'm asked questions like this often... perhaps you can give us the details?

Gary Schuster: That question touches on a number of interesting subjects. First there is the issue of copyright infringement. Contrary to urban legend, there is no particular percentage which needs to be reached in order to permit a finding of infringement. Generally the tests are (i) was there access to the first work, (ii) was there copying, and (iii) was the copying substantial? What is substantial? Unfortunately there is no very satisfying answer to this question. There is actually a book of more than 500 pages on just that subject, called "Substantial Similarity in Copyright Law." One can only examine a number of individual cases to get a feel for when someone has gone too far. Generally it means that the infringer copied a substantial portion of the original work. It doesn’t have to be literal, word-for-word copying. The "total concept and feel" of a work can also be protected by copyright. This is one of those areas where it comes down to "I know it when I see it." One thing that can be said with certainty is that substantial similarity is a question of fact rather than a question of law. The jury will determine whether the two works are substantially similar.

A second concept is that of derivative works. A derivative work is, quite simply, one work that is derived from another. So, for example, a film is derived from a novel. A musical is derived from a film. One of the exclusive rights that a copyright owner has is the exclusive right to prepare derivative works, and authorize others to. If you own the copyright in a painting you have the right to prevent others from creating other works, derived from your painting, without your consent. The scenario you describe about a digital artist modifying your image seems to fit squarely within this description. Since that digital artist created a work derived from yours without permission, I don’t have the slightest hesitation calling him a copyright infringer.

However...there are also the concepts of appropriation art and transformation. Some artists take newspaper articles, product packaging, postcards and all sorts of found objects, including the artwork of others, and assemble them as their own work of art. The found objects are frequently the subjects of copyrights owned by someone else. The found objects might also be trademarks, or the name and likeness of celebrities, both of which are also personal property like copyrights. The work is called appropriation art because the artist "appropriates" the property of someone else and puts it in their artwork. Appropriation art is an increasingly common type of art, and without doubt it can be very creative. I suppose it is advances in technology which have made it possible. However, it clearly bumps into the exclusive right to prepare derivative works and the rights in trademark and name and likeness.

I must also mention another concept in this area, and that is the First Amendment. Because of the First Amendment there are exceptions to the usual rights of ownership of copyright, trademark and name and likeness. This carve-out is known as "fair use". In short, if your work of appropriation art has sufficient First Amendment implications, you may have the "fair use" right to use a copyright, trademark or name and likeness without obtaining permission. This can be illustrated by comparing two actual cases.

In the first, an artist named Gary Saderup made a simple pencil portrait of The Three Stooges and sold t-shirts printed with the drawing. The agent of The Three Stooges sued and the artist lost. In another case an artist name Rick Rush painted Tiger Woods winning one of his early championships. In the background were portraits of some of golf’s greatest champions over many decades and the word "Leaders". The idea was that Woods was a historic golfer and was joining the company of these great champions. Thousands of posters of this painting were printed and sold. Tiger Woods didn’t give permission, didn’t get a penny, and he sued. Unlike the agent for The Three Stooges, he lost.

Tiger Woods lost because the painting was considered to be visual journalism, history and commentary. These First Amendment considerations trumped his right to control the use of his image. You could also say that Rick Rush "transformed" Woods’ image and made something more of it. Gary Saderup, on the other hand, did not transform their images into anything grander or more meaningful. He just copied them. So one work of appropriation art had First Amendment implications and was transforming and the other was not.

To be precise, fair use comes into play when a work is copied for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. The right is not absolute. As in so many areas, there is a balancing test to be done. So for example, even though a school is teaching, it cannot make multiple copies of a textbook for its students and claim fair use. It must buy copies from the publisher.

There is one final point to make. Copyright infringement requires making copies. An original work of art is not a copy. You can paint a portrait of Tiger Woods (even one that is not transformative) without his consent because you are making an original painting and there are no copies. If you print and distribute posters derived from your painting then you are making copies and you do need permission. Unless you can claim fair use! All very interesting. Unfortunately there are still no bright lines to guide artists in their work. I still think that the artist in your example is infringing.

The information in this article is for general information purposes only. It is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice for any particular person or circumstance, or for Internal Revenue Code purposes as described in IRS Circular 230. This article is not a substitute for obtaining legal advice from an attorney based on your particular circumstances.

Links of Interest:

www.jacobowitz.com/
www.jacobowitz.com/schuster.htm

Art Space Talk: Alex Grey

Alex Grey is an artist specializing in spiritual and psychedelic art (or visionary art) that is sometimes associated with the New Age movement. Alex Grey is a Vajrayana practitioner. His oeuvre spans a variety of forms including performance art, process art, installation art, sculpture, and painting. Grey is a member of the Integral Institute. He is also on the board of advisors for the Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics, and is the Chair of Wisdom University's Sacred Art Department. He and his wife Allyson Grey are the co-founders of the Chapel of Sacred Mirrors, aka CoSM, a non-profit institution supporting Visionary Culture in New York City.

Grey's paintings have been featured in venues as diverse as the album art of Tool, SCI, the Beastie Boys and Nirvana, Newsweek magazine, the Discovery Channel, Rave flyers and sheets of blotter acid. His work has been exhibited worldwide, including Feature Inc., Tibet House, Stux Gallery, P.S. 1, The Outsider Art Fair and the New Museum in NYC, the Grand Palais in Paris, the Sao Paulo Biennial in Brazil. Alex has been a keynote speaker at conferences all over the world including Tokyo, Amsterdam, Basel, Barcelona and Manaus. The international psychedelic community has embraced Grey as an important mapmaker and spokesman for the visionary realm.

BS: Alex, can you recall your years as an art student? Also, at what point were you first interested in visionary art?

AG: As an art student I was a nihilist existentialist. I dropped out of art school after two years and went to work for Columbus Outdoor Advertising to paint billboards. I sent invitations to the openings of the new boards I painted, calling the work Capitalist Realism, making them part of the conceptual art movement of the 70's. Then I moved east and attended art school again for a year, studying conceptual and performance art.

Focusing on an examination of polarities such as life and death, I observed and documented a dead dog rotting. Later that year, observing the intuitive and the rational hemispheres of the brain, I shaved off half of my hair. Six months later, I shaved off the other half in a ritual performance. Placing the shaved hair on a human brain, I ate spaghetti, took the universal antidote, syrup of ipecac, and vomited onto the brain and hair. I wrapped the entire mess in a bag and called the performance "Brain Sack". These acts tapped into a deeply disturbed but somewhat shamanic search for meaning.

My study of polarities led me to trek to the North Magnetic Pole to perform "Polar Wandering". I found it ironic that the force humanity relies upon to get it's bearings, the site to which all compasses point, is continually in motion, a phenomenon by that name. Returning, I asked God to give a sign because I felt desperately in need of spirit. Within 24 hours of that supplication I took LSD and experienced the unity of polarities as well as having met my wife, the human embodiment of divine love in my life. LSD was my first "visioning."

After "Polar Wandering", I left art school for good and took a job in a medical school morgue where I prepared bodies for dissection. A student of the subject of consciousness, I felt it was imperative to study the container in which consciousness lives.

BS: You are considered by many to be a master of visionary art. As you know, visionary art is often not accepted by what you have called the "legitimate" art world. In your opinion, why has visionary art struggled?

AG: Considering Modernism and Post-Modernism, the importance of Mystic and Visionary states of consciousness have been downplayed or ignored by most artists, critics and curators. Picasso's Cubism flattened the world into broken surfaces and shadows, with very little spiritual elevation. Pollock's chaotic compositions reflect further fragmentation of self, a loss of center, continuing the existential crisis of Modernism. Pop art is a perfect mirror of our shallow, surface oriented materialist corporate culture. Most recent art that includes religious imagery profanes the sacred (Serrano, Warhol, Gober) or if there are spiritual intentions behind the work, it's appearance is ambiguous (Rothko, Agnes Martin, Turrell).

When art devalues the self and the authenticity of the inner worlds we get art of the absent self, the hollow and shattered self, a hopeless self, in short, the art of today. Outsider Art is one cultural venue where visionary states are considered relevant, but often "Outsider" artists are considered naive or pathological. Humanity needs art that helps us reclaim the sacred experience of life, so that we will take actions that favor our species long term survival.

BS: At the same time... the history of visionary art can be traced back to the dawn of man. The roots of what we call visionary art today is deeply embedded throughout the span of art history, correct?

AG: There is a strong global visionary tradition. Visionary art has existed and continues to exist in every culture from pre-historic to contemporary times. I write about the tradition of visionary art extensively in my book The Mission of Art and speak of it also on the audio cassette The Visionary Artist (SoundsTrue). The 16,000-year old cave paintings of human/animal hybrids, such as the "Sorcerer of Trois Freres," are a good starting point. Ancient shamanic art, such as African ritual masks or Aboriginal rock and bark painting, clearly depict visionary dream-time wanderings and encounters in the lower and upper spirit worlds.

One of the earliest known Western mystic visionary artists was Hildegard of Bingen, a 12th-century German nun. Icons created from her visions are direct gifts of spirit. The 15th-century painter Hieronymus Bosch's "Garden of Delights" is one of the strangest paintings in the world -- an encyclopedia of metamorphic plant/animal/human symbolism. Pieter Brueghel was touched with the same visionary madness. Renaissance artists like Grunewald, Durer and Michelangelo delineated the spirit of Christian mysticism and Gothic realism.

Seventeen century alchemical engravings detail complex philosophical mandalas pointing to union with the divine. William Blake, the 18th/19th-century mystic artist and poet, conversed with angels and received painting instructions from discarnate entities. Blake's work laid the foundations for the 19th-century symbolist and 20th century surrealist and fantastic realist movements in art. In other words, there is a strong foundation of visionary art to be found throughout the span of art history. It is hard to deny that connection, but people often do.

BS: Speaking of art history... some of your imagery is reminiscent of past artists-- Hieronymus Bosch for example. Can you discuss some of your influences? Tell us about your specific roots...

AG: My father was my first influence and I consider him to be the most important teacher I ever had. He was an artist and he encouraged my early drawing. My father guided my development until I became a rebellious teenager. During my teenage years I grew very fond of Michelangelo's art. His Neo-Platonic idealism combined with gothic Catholicism is very tripped out. I would have to say that Michelangelo's obsession with the struggle of body and soul is something that I can relate to in my own work. Other influences would include Blake, Rembrandt, Van Gogh, Tibetan and Hindu Tantric art, Ernst Fuchs, Jackson Pollock, Jean Delville, Pavel Tchelitchew and especially my wife Allyson Grey.

BS: What would you say to people who do not have knowledge about visionary art? How would you describe a work of visionary art to them? How would you introduce them to your art?

AG: A work of visionary art can shock a person out of their normal thinking patterns, and help them to see the world in a new way, help them to transfigure their perception of reality. Obviously, it's only one of many potential catalysts to healing and transformation, but I think it can be a significant one. It is as if the artist reveals his or her soul's journey through art and leaves the door open for viewers to find their own path.

As for my work, it is about the direct reproduction of intense visions. One's memory gets etched by the "naturally occurring" or the "psychedelic" visionary experience and there is something you don't understand about them, something profoundly disorienting but important in them. My goal is to bring back the state of wonder and amazement as directly as possible. That way, the contemplative viewer can resonate with it and it might reinforce an experience that has meaning for them.

My work examines the nature of consciousness, life, human identity and relationships through various mediums and imagery. I paint representations of the physical body and interlace the subtle vital and psychical energy systems from both eastern and western occult mystical and medical traditions, the acupuncture meridians and points, the chakra systems, halos, etc. I take a multicultural and multidimensional perspective in order to get as many truths as possible into my vision of our divine nature.

BS: There has been some controversy over your work through the years-- specifically your use of drugs as a means of exploration. As you know, the United States has taken a hard line against drug use. What are your thoughts on this issue?

AG: I am not an advocate of indiscriminate drug taking, by any means. However, when I am asked to comment on the source of my own personal inspiration it would be hypocritical not to discuss my entheogenic experiences.

A Johns Hopkins medical study, reported in Psychopharmacology Journal (2006), has proven scientifically that psilocybin can enable people to have full blown life transforming mystical experiences. Because the mystical experience is the foundation of all world religions, the United States government is interfering with people's freedom to practice religion by criminalizing the use of these sacraments. I am a stand for cognitive liberty, the right to alter consciousness anyway one sees fit, as long as the user causes no harm to anyone else. This is a right that requires a mighty sense of responsibility. Some people are allergic to peanuts and could die if they eat them. Peanuts should not be outlawed and are not safe for everyone.

An artist does not have to experiment with drugs to create visionary art but must experience the visionary state. Adult artists who are interested in this type of exploration, should consider an appropriate set and setting to enhance the sacred dimensions of one's consciousness. Young people should not take drugs. They should be forming their identity and strengthening their ego, not dissolving it prematurely.

BS: What about the dangers of using drugs to explore yourself and the beyond? Do you have concerns about that?

AG: A person could poison themselves and die from drinking alcohol all day. Smoking marijuana day and night for a week would not kill you. Alcohol is legal but it is far more toxic than marijuana. Corporations decide which drugs are forbidden and which are promoted. There is no known toxic dose of LSD and used in a therapeutic setting it has the ability to relieve people from addiction to alcohol. Ibogaine can alleviate an addiction to heroine in one session. Psychoactive drugs need to be studied and safer inebriants such as marijuana, should be legal.

BS: Can you talk about the influence that drugs have had on visionary art and art in general? You mentioned the sixties earlier...

AG: The psychedelic '60s spawned a new approach and style to all the arts including clothing design, graphic design, music, film, painting and sculpture. Psychedelics influenced every aspect of visual life. Ernst Fuchs and Mati Klarwein are two of the greatest painters that came to prominence from that era and both were obviously influenced by psychedelics. In the 70's, dystopic visions of contemporary hell-worlds were stunningly portrayed in the works of H.R. Giger, famous for his work on the movie, "Alien." Keith Haring, one of the most powerful artists of the 80's credited LSD as the inspiring source of his style. What unites these artists is their unconventionally intense imaginations and their capacity to reveal the full spectrum of the vast visionary dimensions of the mind, the heavens and the hells.

BS: Alex, can you talk about some of the symbolism behind your work... the eyes for example?

AG: The eye is the lens through which we see and through which we recognize others. It is the focus of awareness. The eye is the window to the soul, an outer manifestation of awareness in the deepest sense. A multiplication of eyes signifies expanded or increased awareness. An infinite field of eyes represents infinite. awareness.

BS: What about the spiritual side of your art?

AG: Art can be a spiritual practice, enabling the practitioner to develop qualities of mental clarity, mindfulness of the moment, wisdom, compassion and access to revelations of higher mystic states of awareness. A contemplative method, such as yoga or meditation, will stabilize and assist in the progress of spiritual awareness. An artist's craft can become a contemplative method, and the creations may provide outward signs of an inner spiritual journey.

Art is a covenant relationship between spirit, the artist and the viewer. The artist, if he or she has an inspiring spiritual experience, has a responsibility to translate and transmit that experience as closely as possible so as to evoke a similar experience in the viewer.

BS: Does the use of drugs help you-- and others --to find the spiritual in art?

AG: Many people have told me that they experienced my artwork for the first time while taking their first acid trip. They tell me that it helped them to have a spiritual opening. Not everyone that uses drugs has a religious experience. However, many report a sense of unbounded compassion for others and themselves during an Ecstasy, or LSD, or mushroom experience.

During a trip the typical boundaries of our identity dissolve and one may be able to experience their unity with all dimensions of reality simultaneously. It can be overwhelming, but it can also be a guidepost and affirmation of the soul's mission in life. A good trip can reveal the perfection, beauty and preciousness of every moment.

BS: Finally, do you have any advice for emerging visionary artists regarding success in the art market? Perhaps you have some suggestions for them?

AG: Draw and paint everyday. Create a unique body of work. Study what is important and make your art about the most important thing. Read Rilke's Letters to a Young Poet. Honor your visions by noting them whenever you have them. Always carry a sketchbook and enter in it daily. Create a website for your work and print a postcard and a business card and give them out. Write an artist's statement -- over and over again. Learn to talk about your work so that it inspires others. Go to galleries and meet other artists. A certain amount of solitude is necessary but don't be isolated. Study the masters. Immerse yourself and become obsessed with your art and art in general.

The best advice about becoming a great artist was given to us by our daughter when she was six years old. We made a very small self-help book from this advice that Allyson and I give to every one of our students (and which you can purchase from www.alexgrey.com) -- it says: "Be Yourself", "Do Your Best", "Never Give Up."

You can learn more about Alex Grey by visiting his website-- www.alexgrey.com. You can read more of my interviews by visiting the following page-- www.myartspace.com/interviews.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Art Space Talk: James Rosenquist

James Rosenquist is an acclaimed American artist and is considered to be one of the key figures in the Pop Art movement. James has received numerous honors, including selection as "Art In America Young Talent USA" in 1963, appointment to a six-year term on the Board of the National Council of the Arts in 1978, and receiving the Golden Plate Award from the American Academy of Achievement in 1988. In 2002, Fundacion Cristobal Gabarron conferred upon him its annual international award for art, in recognition of his great contributions to universal culture.

Since his first early career retrospectives in 1972, organized by the Whitney Museum of American Art and the Wallraf-Richartz Museum, he has been the subject of several gallery and museum exhibitions in the United States and abroad. His work has continued to develop in exciting ways and is an ongoing influence on younger generations of artists

Sun Li, Oil and acrylic on canvas, 74.3 x 48 in. (188.6 x 121.9 cm.), 2005. Courtesy Acquavella Galleries. Painted at Aripeka, FL

BS: James, can you tell us about your early years as far as art is concerned? Perhaps you could reflect on some of your early academic experiences?

JR: I can remember my studies at the University of Minnesota. I studied under Cameron Booth. Cameron was my first teacher and he had studied with Hans Hofmann after World War I. Cameron focused on dynamic picture making, including Cubism-- ideas about form and fragments. I guess you could say that I was interested in how to make a dynamic picture plane.

It was shortly after that time that I won a scholarship at the Art Students League and went to New York. While at the Art Students League I studied with George Grosz, Will Barnet, Morris Kantor, Robert Beverly Hale and so on. I devoted my time to studying composition. I soon went broke though. I was actually homeless for a short time.

Fix- Speed of Light, Oil on canvas, 68"x 50" (172.7 x 127.0 cm), 2000. Private Collection. Painted in Aripeka, FL.

BS: How did you get out of that rut?

JR: A friend helped me get a job. I worked as a chauffeur and bartender for a year and then went back to sign painting. I had painted billboards for a short time in Minnesota with General Outdoor Advertising, so I was already a union member. I painted all sorts of things during that time. I ended up quiting after a couple of fellows fell to their death. I'd worked on a scaffold 20 stories up myself and after their deaths it dawned on me that the job was dangerous. I guess you could say that it put things in perspective.

BS: Your personal artwork has roots in billboard painting, can you discuss that?

JR: I'd say it is the other way around-- my billboard painting has roots in my artwork. Billboard painting did not teach me how to be a painter. However, you do learn a lot from painting those big billboards. You have to think about light, color and everything. I was also faced with different tasks each morning. For example, I'd come to work in the morning to find various items on my desk-- everything from a tomato to a pack of cigarettes-- that I was supposed to put in the right place on a billboard sign in Times Square. I'd have to take these items and change their scale in order to fit them into a diagram. I learned how to render things well.

Joystick, Oil on canvas 17' x 46; (518.2 x 1402.1 cm), 2003. Collection of the Artist. Painted in Aripeka, FL.

BS: You've talked about your academic years and early work experiences... what about your early paintings?

JR: During those years the art schools were still teaching people how to express themselves by throwing paint. I was not interested in splashing paint around or slapping a canvas. I wanted to do something different. So I started thinking about fragments and how I could make them so that the things closest to you would be recognized last. I wanted the space to spill forward instead of receding back like all painting had done in the past. It always seemed that paintings are like a window that we look into-- I was not interested in that. I wanted my pictures to have teeth-- to jump out at the viewer.

Time Blades - Learning Curves, Oil on canvas, 102 x 258 inches (259.1 x 655.3 cm), 2007

BS: James, you are known as a Pop artist. Is this a label that you are comfortable with?

JR: They called me a Pop artist because I used recognizable imagery. The critics like to group people together. I didn't meet Andy Warhol until 1964. I did not really know Andy or Roy Lichtenstein that well. We all emerged separately.

BS: James, did you admire any specific artist during those years?

JR: I really enjoy de Kooning. When I was a student everyone was copying him. I liked his involvement with paint and color. I also liked him because he did not give a damn-- he was not self-conscious. Students today don't realize that de Kooning was really a rough and tough type of guy. Today people talk about underground artists-- well, at that time de Kooning was THE underground artist. He enjoyed a good drink and a good joke-- or should I say bad? He once told me that he liked my spaghetti painting and went on to say that it was "sexy".

Intellect Seeking a Worm Hole, Oil on canvas with mirror, 66 x 59 inches (167.5 x 149.9 cm), 2007

BS: Let us jump forward to present day. As you know, there has been a move toward combining high technology with painting. Some artists are utilizing video art or other technological sources, such as the Internet, within the context of their painting. Is that something that you are interested in-- the use of high technology alongside painting... or as painting, digital painting for example?

JR: I'm not all that interested in the Internet. I don't use the Internet as a source for my work and I doubt I ever will. This goes for other types of high technology as well-- such as virtual reality. I'm just not interested in it. I guess you could say that I like things simple. I like painting to be simple. It fascinates me to create beautiful paintings with the simplest means. I'm more interested in the way that people paint with sticks, cloth, or brushes instead of high technology.

IDEA, 3:50 A.M., Oil on canvas, 63 x 49 inches (160 x 124.5 cm), 2007

BS: So what are paintings to you in general?

JR: Paintings are memories. Memories of the painter who painted them. Memories that can be shared as well. Paintings are things to remember things by. For example, I see my work as auto-biographical. It is all auto-biographical.

BS: So do you ever have any regrets when a painting leaves your studio?

JR: I've actually bought some of my paintings back for thousands more than what they were originally sold for. Letting go is part of this game. You never really let go though, do you...

BS: Aside from the images that you create, what do you like about the action of painting-- the motion and movement itself?

JR: I like the physical connection of painting with a paintbrush. It is fun to paint these large paintings with one arm. It is a workout. I enjoy that use of energy. In many ways my paintings are about energy-- both in how they are created and the image itself.

Glare - Speed of Light, Oil on canvas, 6'6"x 6" (198.1 x 182.9 cm), 2001. Private Collection. Painted in Aripeka, FL.

BS: James, do you have any advice for art students? In your opinion, what should a younger artist focus on? What should he or she be wary of?

JR: Fine Art is not a career - commercial art is. You may be so talented that no one will buy your work until after you're dead, like Vincent van Gogh. Focus on things that happened to you that you can't figure out.

BS: Any advice for artists in general?

JR: As I said, focus on things that happened to you that you can't figure out. Go back to your youth, go back to when you were very young and remember the things that happened to you, things that were very odd and peculiar.

BS: Finally, what are you working on at this time?

JR: I've been working on putting together an upcoming show for Berlin. I've practically been living in my studio recently.

You can learn more about James Rosenquist by visiting his website-- www.jimrosenquist-artist.com. You can read more of my interviews by visiting the following page-- www.myartspace.com/interviews.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Art Space Talk: Bob Smith

Bob Smith, formerly known as Patrick Brill, is a British contemporary artist who is also known by the pseudonym 'Bob & Roberta Smith'. Bob studied at the University of Reading and Goldsmiths College. He has had exhibited extensively throughout the UK, including exibits at the Tate Modern, Whitechapel Art Gallery, and The Lux Center.


BS: Patrick, you are better known by your pseudonym Bob and Roberta Smith. My understanding is that you created several persona's and types of work while seeking gallery representation. Bod and Roberta Smith was the first persona to gain a positive response. Can you tell our readers why you created those persona's and why you still go by the name Bob and Roberta Smith? What other names did you use? Did the names-- including Bob and Roberta Smith --represent anyone?

BS: I no longer go by Patrick Brill. I changed my name to Bob Smith ten years ago. Journalists still refer to me as by my old name. Wikipedia does not help. The discussion about my name is not interesting to me. What does it matter?

BS: You studied at the University of Reading and Goldsmiths College. Can you tell us about your experiences during those year? Who were your instructors and how did they influence you?

BS: I enjoyed my time at both places but the work i did as a student was rubbish. I liked Bill Culbert at Reading and Ron Hasleden. They ran an area of teaching together which was interesting it was fluxus based very liberal and students did a lot of performance. I did not have anything really to say in those mediums then so I did painting, but I liked what they did. They did not really teach me.

At Goldsmiths I was taught by Jean Fisher. One day she brought Jimmie Durham into our studio. He blew me away. I loved him. I love his work. Its very powerful. In general I think the artists who taught all the YBA artists are far greater more powerful artists than the YBA's themselves. I like Susan Hiller and Phylida Barlow, Gustav Metzgar much more than anybody closer to my generation. I also had a studio visit from a Chilean artist Lucia Norgueria which was really insightful. Sadly she died. it was a tragedy for art.

BS: You are well known for painting slogans in a unique bright colored lettering style. You use discarded wood boards and banners as your surface of choice. The slogans often challenge art, popular culture, and politics.. and you utilize them for your activist campaigns. Can you tell us why you decided to go in this direction with your work-- when did you first have the idea to work with slogans?

BS: I was a painter as A STUDENT and I always liked to put words in the paintings but as a painter I ran aground. I was successful an I won grants to study in Rome and New York but it did not mean anything to me. I was in New York in the late 1980's and I spent all my grant money. I had to give up painting. So I started doing performance. The performances would require scripts and prompts so that started me writing. I was happier, From that it was a short step to making the writings into installations. I try never to think about them like I did the paintings. I just enjoy the colours because they are bright.

BS: It seems you would rather focus on today instead of yesterday-- as an interviewer I will admit that I do sometimes focus on the past in order to gain insight into how people see the work that they have done with the views that they have at present. Would you say that you are a 'here and now' sort of person? If so, how does that reflect in your performances?

BS: I never like to do the same thing twice. I do however make the same signs again and again just to get the points across but I never do the same performances twice once they have been experienced by me that's enough. Its all about context and time anyway. Those things change too rapidly.

BS: Some of your work has caused controversy. Have you ever offended anyone or been censored?

BS: The point is to annoy people. Make some people laugh. Try to get hit. Lead an interesting life. Most of my shows piss off someone although my writing is getting more reflective.

BS: When we think of art we often think of serious images that deal with serious issues. Do you feel that it is important for people not to take art so seriously-- to remember that art can be fun and deal with important issues at the same time?

BS: I don't really like humour in art. I think its trivial. Sometimes people laugh at what I do, but I don't set out to do that. I would rather people laugh at me than with me. laugh at my seriousness. laugh at my stupidity but please lets not laugh together at our cleverness.

BS: Are you an artist first and activist second... or activist first and artist second? What are your thoughts on using art to cause, manipulate, or enforce social change?

BS: I can't stand artist activists, I just don't believe them. Activism is for the activist and almost never does any good. I am a human being, I make art, you could too, maybe you do? The world is beautiful but idiots are killing people, it should stop. That's where I stand. I don't have any power and I don't want to tell people what to believe.

BS: You host The Bob & Roberta Smith Radio Show called MAKE YOUR OWN DAMN MUSIC which is on Resonance FM. You also perform music with a group known as The Ken Ardley Playboys. It would seem that music is an important part of your life. How does music inspire you? In your opinion, how is visual art and music related?

BS: I have a very limited musical ability but I love it so much. I try to write songs.. They are not good. I like truthfulness in art so music rings true to me. Daniel Johnstone, Bob Dylan, Shoenberg, Kurt Weil, Ravel, L'enfant et les sortilege, Mark E Smith, I like instruments as objects. I don't have a clear idea about it. Lots of artists have bands these days. I think it is good. The music is not always good. Playing a guitar can be like making a painting, a really pointless activity done a million times better by everyone else, but I don't think that should stop people. Just don't charge too much admission!

BS: Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are friends with Mark McGowan... I've interviewed Mark twice. Have you ever collaborated with Mark... if not, would you if there was an opportunity to do so?

BS: I do know Mark really well. I admire him. He is one of the best artists working in Britain. I have done things with him although nothing really major. I think what he does is really important art. He is next to Gustav Metzgar in my pantheon of worthwhile artists which includes Susan Hiller, Lucia Norgueria, Helen Chadwick, Phylada Barlow , Jessica Voorsanger, Hayley Newman and Liz Arnold.

BS: In regards to the British art scene, what is your opinion of the Stuckists and their views? If you ask Charles Thomson he would say that most people in the UK want art to move away from the art that has strong support by Charles Saatchi and others. Would you agree? What do you think of Stuckism?

BS: I would like the Stuckists if any of them were good as artists... however, sadly they are not much cop. Very few of them could put a line round a plant pot. Sexton Ming is the one exception. He is a brilliant poet but I think even he would admit he is no Leonardo Da Vinci. I think the battle against Charles Saatchi is boring and over. Saatchi always just bought young artists work and now he has his website which aims to help young artists. I don't think he is an ogre.

The real baddies in the Art World now are Jay Joplin and Gagosian because they have taken some quite decent artists and turned them into Faberge Egg makers. Art is more that an investment opportunity for Oligarchs. All artists should be allow themselves to be experimental and politically radical. No one needs the kind of money Damien Hirst generates. He should cool down and make some decent new work instead on churning out the same old .......... If anyone needed their 'Bob Dylan after he had his smash on the motorbike where he did nothing for a few years', period, its Damien. . The same goes for most of the White Cube artists.

However my point is not the same as the Stuckists. Although I don't find many of the YBA's all that interesting its not because they are conceptual or fashionable or even successful, it is because they need to move on. I think many of them have great work to come but the current greedy moment needs to shift.

BS: What are you working on at this time? Do you have any exhibits planned for 2008?

BS: I am a living sign-- the Bob Smith diary's --at Hales Gallery... the fourth Plinth Jamboree and a great show with people who were influenced by Paul; Thek in ZKM Germany.

BS: Speaking of exhibits... what are some of the concerns you have about the state of the art world today?

BS: I like the art world today. I like Frieze and all that. I can remember when Art in London was shit. Its really exciting BUT I think artists should always aspire to an art that turns things upside down and not just participate. Its more important than ever that Matts Gallery, Peer, The Tates The Whitechapel etc... promote difficult art that is impossible to sell.

BS: I noticed that you use the Internet as a tool for exposure. What is your opinion about the Internet in regards to reaching out to people with visual art and music?

BS: I have had an eye infection recently which means that using the Internet, responding to your questions, and looking at a screen is like looking at letraset on a light bulb... so I hate it these days. I would rather we meet in a pub than me sit at home and write this like some kid doing homework. However, I can see it is useful.

BS: I'd buy you a round if I was able to warp to your location! Back to technology... video art and performance art has gained a lot of ground due to the Internet. The advent of the Internet and affordable recording equipment has allowed video artists and performance artists to show their work with ease. Do you think there could be a downside to this? In other words, would you say that the viewer who observes these works online is missing out on the energy that they would observe or experience had they watched the video or performance at a gallery or other venue? The viewing environment can be crucial to video art and performance art, correct? What are your thoughts on this?

BS: I am not sure I agree. I like youtube. It gives access to so much obscure stuff. Some performance art is best accessible by someone telling you about it in the pub. The idea is the important part. Obviously that is not true for everything, but I'm not too bothered about being there. I don't mind turning up late.

BS: With the two previous questions in mind... do you have any advice for emerging artists?

BS: I have advice to emerging people... not artists. Do what you want to do. Don't hurt people, but make your life interesting. Don't go to work for other people. Don't betray people. Try to be truthful. Think all the time. Read............ lay around. Try to work it all out. Stare out the window. Eat well.

BS: Finally, when all is said and done... what is the message you want to leave behind?

BS: It is your turn now.

You can learn more about Bob Smith by visiting his website-- www.bobandrobertasmith.co.uk. You can read more of my interviews by visiting the following page-- www.myartspace.com/interviews.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin

Art Space Talk: Chehalis Hegner

Chehalis Hegner received her MFA in Visual Arts at the Art Institute of Boston in June, 2005. Her mentors include photographer Arno Rafael Minkkinen, George Fifield (Decordova Museum and Sculpture Park and founder of the Boston Cyber Arts Festival), Jonathan Singer of Singer Editions, Boston, and Franz C. Nicolay. Hegner received her B.A. at Berklee College of Music and is also a graduate of the Interlochen Arts Academy at Interlochen, Michigan. In 2006 she completed the Boston Lawyers for the Arts seven month program on Professional Development for Artists. Chehalis is currently represented by Jordan faye Contemporary in Baltimore, MD.

Chastity Belt by Chehalis Hegner

Brian Sherwin: Chehalis, you earned an MFA in Visual Arts at the Art Institute of Boston in 2005. Can you tell us about that program? Who were your mentors?

Chehalis Hegner: The MFA program at The Art Institute of Boston attracted me for a variety reasons: First, Art Institute of Boston MFA candidates research and seek out possible mentors from their field of interest. The mentors are not directly related to the program. This is optimal because the student has the opportunity to work with artist mentors who reflect his/her specific interests. In my case, these initial liaisons led to long term relationships that continue to infuse my work today. My mentors included George Fifield, founder of the Boston Cyber Arts Festival and former New Media Curator for Decordova Museum, photographer Arno Rafael Minkkinen, and Jonathan Singer (Singer Editions in Boston, MA.)

BS: Would you like to discuss other aspects of your academic background and how those experiences have guided you as an artist?

CH: Undergraduate training as a musician (singer/songwriter and guitarist) has had a deep influence on my work as a visual artist. Having had a direct experience in understanding the principles of musical composition and performance has influenced the way that I make photographs: such as a sensitivity for dynamic and tonal range, rhythm, melody (line), contrast, and the emotional expression of the content.

Other academic studies in the visual arts have enriched my conscious connections to other artists, past and present. Those studies helped me to identify my artistic "family," thereby understanding my work within a broader context.

Butt Wait- Have you seen... by Chehalis Hegner

BS: In 2006 you were nominated by Arno Minkkinen for the PRC/POV 30th anniversary exhibition. Can you tell us about that experience and how you felt to be nominated?

CH: I answer this question with a great sense of joy and gratitude, because Arno has been, and always will be, one of the great lights in my life. It must also be said that to work with Arno is to experience the lineage of his teachers and their teachers as well. Arno has a great love for the history of photography ~ this aspect of his teaching imparts a sense that, together, we are all making one great work of art. Knowing this, one of the questions to ask when making a work is: with this photograph am I contributing to the One Work, or am I somehow taking away from it? He never put it to me exactly like this, but it is an idea that came to me as a result of my many conversations with him.

BS: Chehalis, allow me to ask some questions about your work. I understand that you are interested in the healing quality of photography. Can you discuss this in detail?

CH: Photography is meaningful to me because it allows me to be a witness: a person who is present and willing to observe consciously, without judgment. Being a witness ignites a fundamental process of healing or change. Many of my subjects felt transformed by having been seen and photographed in this way.

This symbolic anointing occurs because we rarely have the experience of of being genuinely seen by another, or even by ourselves. Our society structures life as a fragmented experience ~ based on various forms of alienation, rather than on community building and sharing. Making pictures addresses a basic human need: to work toward a state of unity, which is our forgotten natural condition.

Whether in the genre of self-portraiture or working with a subject, photography has shown me a place of inner vitality infused with the possibility of discovery. It has been a mostly quiet journey, punctuated by the beautiful sound of the camera’s shutter and the vast array of emotions present in each passing moment.

Arthur Ganson by Chehalis Hegner

BS: So, when you are behind the camera do you view yourself as if you are on the outside looking in or in the inside looking out? Or are you one with your subject? I suppose this is a philosophical question... is there a personal philosophy behind your work?

CH: This is a complex question. I feel that in both self-portrait work and when working with a subject, I am playing multiple roles simultaneously (I.e. photographer, actor, director, interpreter, witness, and sometimes muse.) As the photographer, I feel I am on the outside looking in, but as I identify with the subject or become the subject myself, I feel as if I am on the inside looking out at the Big Eye (or, the lens of my camera).

I may project onto my subject any story that exists in my mind. In that sense I sometimes feel that I am one with my subject. In reality, we are separate beings. If I have a sense of becoming one with my subject, I also feel I am becoming one with myself. I am doing my best to stay away from "beliefs and personal philosophies" right now. Clinging to ideas separates me from the ever unfolding experience of being a witness ~ and to me, that is where the sense of mystery, humanity, and beauty exists.

BS: Would you say that the images you capture are a reflection of your identity-- or to go further --your soul?

CH: Identity is something we create in order to feel safer in a universe that is incomprehensible and overwhelming. My pictures often reflect an inner need to strip away surface identity in an effort to understand how to experience life more simply, more wholly. We are so much more than our stories. I am interested in having the experience of living from a place that is ultimately deeper than an exterior identity. In that sense, do I photograph my soul? Certainly to encapsulate that state of being in a photographic image is the ultimate challenge. One of the very few places I’ve seen this in the history of art is in the Mona Lisa. Looking at her is a humbling experience as she witnesses us.

BS: Chehalis, are you interested in symbolism? For example, does water in your images hold a certain meaning for you... such as purity or the fear of drowning?

CH: Symbolism can certainly be used to shape and project the inner meaning of an image. I think photographs are similar to dreams. We dream the image into a tangible reality on photo paper; then we have the rest of our lives to decipher the deeper messages that our unconscious has put forth. Often for me, photographs are harbingers of what is yet to come ~ in terms of my own understanding about their content. The photographs often seem to posses an inner knowing long before I am ready to see their messages in the light of consciousness.

BS: Would you say that photography allows you to step closer to your vision of truth compared to other media-- or to at least scratch at the surface of truth as you perceive it?

CH: It’s hard to envision an ultimate, platonic ideal of truth…but photography is the medium where I feel most at home. Maybe photography is a kind of Visual Yoga. Perhaps another artist may feel more at home with a paintbrush or chisel. It is, as you say, a mere scratching of the surface, however. Is the truth a fixed thing,
or is it elusive because it, too, is necessarily always changing?

Crucifix by Chehalis Hegner

BS: Chehalis, is photography a spiritual process for you? How do feel after you set the camera aside?

CH: In a tangible sense, it is obvious that my eye is my captain. Even so, the camera also feels like a separate entity with whom I join forces…sometimes I have a distinct feeling that it is the lens herself that is making the pictures, and not ‘me.’ In this sense, the camera becomes my guide, and I surrender to its direction. But perhaps it is most accurate to say that we venture out together.

I came to photography after many years as a musician because I lost my eyesight in the left eye. It is true that sometimes it is through our greatest losses that we begin to to awaken. In blindness, there is new light, and new sight. The camera has been integral in this process and it is a spiritual journey. Yes.

After the camera is set aside, I usually feel a sense of fullness, but I also experience a feeling similar to the high one gets after a long strenuous hike. If I don’t make pictures for a while, a kind of tension seems to build up in my psyche…as if there is always another question that needs to be put to inquiry and a body that hungers to hold the camera physically to make the exposures that may offer a clue to an answer. The camera allows me to go into the center of the question in order to explore it.

Making photographs also has an erotic quality ~ not in the sense that it is a sexual experience, but because an intimate connection is felt through having deeply seen something or someone. When the camera is set aside, it brings with it with a feeling of being deeply sated; sometimes this is accompanied by a sweet state of exhaustion ~ having ventured deeply, sometimes far beyond the known and ‘safe’ realms life.

BS: Chehalis, can you tell us about your series A Woman's Greatest Fear? How does this series convey some of the issues and positions that you have stressed with your previous work?

CH: That series, still in progress, is a response to a survey that was conducted. Women were asked what their greatest fear of men was, and the overwhelming response was "to be raped or killed." Men were asked what their greatest fear of women was: the most prevalent answer was "to be laughed at."

I felt the outrageous imbalance in the survey results so I decided to make some pictures about it. I hope the picture will help to stimulate a dialog between men and women. Can we create a world where we all feel safer? Yes, the topic of feeling unsafe in the world as a woman has been expressed in my previous work, but perhaps in less obvious ways.

In this series I depict the woman wearing a fur coat because of the association of the female as surrogate prey. It is a game where the male dominates the female in an attempt to subdue her inner and outer strength. If he terrifies her enough, he will never have to feel humiliated by her laughter that he is "not enough" to satisfy her.

The the use the culturally based settings (Roman ruins, churches, museums, playgrounds), I am also commenting on how a male-dominated society, itself, subdues women on a global scale.

On the Table by Chehalis Hegner

BS: What are you working on at this time? Also, will you be exhibiting in 2008?

CH: Right now I am mostly working on two series: "Witness at the Precipice," which I described in your question above on the potential of healing and photography. The other is my ongoing series addressing what it means to be a woman in contemporary society.

I am currently preparing work for a solo exhibition at St. Gauden’s Contemporary gallery in Cornish, NH that opens on May 31st of this year.

BS: Where can our readers view your work in person? Are you represented by a gallery?

CH: Currently I am represented by Jordan Faye Contemporary in Baltimore, MD, and otherwise I am presently self-represented. Exhibitions, Jordan Faye Contemporary, and studio visits are ways to see work in person. Anyone interested in being on my mailing list for exhibitions and other activities can contact me through my website: www.chehalishegner.com

You can learn more about Chehalis Hegner by visiting her website-- www.chehalishegner.com. Chehalis is also a member of the myartspace community-- www.myartspace.com/chephoto. You can read more of my interviews at www.myartspace.com/interviews.

Take care, Stay true,

Brian Sherwin