It’s been said that a simple definition of an artist is “someone who pays attention and reports back”. This works because it denotes a sound concept, consisting of only two simple steps. A process which is in theory about as simple and direct as it is in practice. Two steps which seem simple enough but whose simplicity belies a practice which is only as significant as the artist’s commitment to it. First, pay attention. Then, report back. Temporarily taking these two steps out of their intended sequence I would like to begin by reporting back on just what it is that this artist has been paying attention to.
“The image is not an idea” “It is a radiant node or cluster; it is what I can, and must call a VORTEX, from which, and through which, and into which, ideas are constantly rushing. One can only call it a VORTEX. And from this necessity came the name ‘Vorticism’.” These words were written by the movement's ideological parent the poet Ezra Pound just over 100 years ago. Pound had been greatly influenced by the works of the poet Plotinus who says that the enlightened soul returns to its origin, which is a whirlpool. It is suspended in the center from which the circle proceeds as life in the intelligible world consists of the energy of the intellect. The physical basis of a whirlpool is water and yet no combination of water with anything else will produce a whirlpool unless there is also present an energy derived from elsewhere. It is on the question of energy that everything turns. The difference between a whirlpool and a pool is the whirl. Pound would say that the greatest obstacle to creating great art in whatever form is the lack of ability to focus the attention. In an effort to overcome this, he offers a fairly simple exercise in concentration. First, take any ordinary thing “allowing the mind to pursue any associated by-paths…. Think of the thing in question from the following viewpoints: (1) The thing itself. (2) The place from whence it came. (3) Its purpose or use. (4) Its associations. (5) Its probable end. Thus the simple thing may suddenly multiply into many things and yet the method remains the same. And yet in the beginning when everything was one and at rest for an infinite time into this space entered the Mind of mankind which put the great vortex in motion turning in the gyre, whirling in the pool as things became themselves, each containing something of every other thing. Then the Mind withdrew to let the world be. All things were formed by the forces of Love and Strife, which were mixed in the vortex, some with more love in them, some with more strife, in infinite combinations. The Vortex is the end of time. The vortex is the beginning of time.
And so the image is seen as a succession of creative moments rather than a continuous and sustained period of development. The first of these creative moments in my journey came just as i completed my Masters thesis project at Pratt Institute, thus signaling the completion of my degree in digital arts, and taking the form of a large 3D printing project which was spurred by my fascination with the concept of virtual sculpting– crafting elements through digital means and then bearing witness to their tactile materialization. The project entitled “Galatea” was thus born, drawing inspiration from the myth of Pygmalion whose sculpted figure of a woman called Galatea came to life. The project marked the beginning of my artistic journey which, like the myth that inspired it, would be typified by the same underlying ethos, the intrinsic connection between the ethereal realm of creative expression and the tangible world.
Henceforth, the evolution of my artistic process became characterized by a dynamic interplay between intentionality and serendipity. While i’ve always used a wide variety of mediums such as acrylic, oil, markers, ink etc., the aspect which has remained a constant across a myriad of mediums has been the preoccupation with the human form as a central subject. Other than this principle preoccupation, the only constant has been change. The latter manifested through an endless experimentation with different applications of the medium. A pivotal juncture in this evolutionary trajectory transpired amidst the period just prior to my inaugural solo exhibition in New York at Kleio Projects, titled: “The 7-Minute Special”. Therein, I devised a methodology through which the trajectory of my drawn line could serve as a conduit through which the strange and unfamiliar would gradually materialize on the surface until finally emerging as a finished work that has now become oddly familiar. This approach, rooted in the neurographic process, served to facilitate a symbiotic interplay between the conscious and subconscious. The resultant imagery would coalesce into either singular figures or a bricolage of interconnected forms, each imbued with personal significance as well as universal associative resonances. Allowing myself to reserve any fanciful associations associated with the image until it’s physical evolution has become complete, at which point, all bets are off and the flights of fanciful associations are free to come flooding in.
Subsequently came my second exhibition “Live @ the Crying Room” which occurred in 2019 at “Tornado Things” in Brooklyn, New York. My latest engagement with the medium of paint underwent a whole new type of change. In it, I embraced a more assertive manipulation of paint, orchestrating unique textural compositions achieved through an increasingly freewheeling and gestural application of the paint. What emerged from this process was an impulsive and unbridled artistic channeling. The point being to tap into a realm of visceral sensations, amorphous, ineffable and often inaccessible to the uninitiated.
In anticipation of the forthcoming "Artful Crimes" exhibition in 2023, at the Mark Hachem Gallery in Beirut Lebanon, my approach to selecting subject matter had become thorough, the culmination of each piece resulting from painstaking composition. I found solace in the detached process of documentation, allowing myself to immerse fully in the act of painting, as the blueprint for the series was meticulously laid out during the preliminary stages.
The period of this art exhibition helped to propel me towards a deeper exploration of the creative process. Along the way, many boundaries have become blurry, particularly the ones separating observation and introspection.I wanted more than anything to delve into a concept which had the ability to open a door. One through which I could access the truth and nature of my hidden inner self. I realized that what I needed was to bring back a feeling, something visceral which could draw me in close enough to where I might better understand. Ideally, this closer vantage point would reveal concepts coming from within and going towards without.
I also grew equally concerned with employing photography as a diagram to guide my painting composition. The monocular perspective of photographic imagery failed to capture the dynamic temporal shifts inherent in the world around us. In the time span of the painting's progression, various shifts occur on psychological and visual levels, altering one's initial impulse. Thus, disconnecting from a projected image became crucial, releasing me from the burden of representational accuracy and prompting acceptance that the painting might not convey my initial expectations.
As a painter, I quickly learned to appreciate the significance of the surface on which I worked. This understanding led me to become engrossed in exploring the myriad physical and conceptual layers inherent within it as I sought to further dissect the thematic depth embedded within the surface itself. Over time, I became deeply enthralled with the wide spectrum of both philosophical and physical ideas related to the surface. As a concept, the surface has been characterized in a number of ways, notably the Hindu concept of the veil of Maya, a powerful and persistent illusion which masks the true nature of reality like a curtain between the seen and the unseen. Meanwhile, in the artworld, abstract expressionists like Frank Stella have articulated concepts based on the fact that “only what can be seen there is there”, thus squarely putting the emphasis on direct engagement with the surface of the canvas as the final object of the painting is ultimately flat. Over time, I developed a big fascination for the potential within a painting to create the illusion of space. Once the artist has mastered this illusion, he can literally create space anywhere, whereas on earth, space is something which we cannot create more of.
The surface of the painting exists only in space and yet if I am using it to tell a story that does occupy time, then lo and behold: the ostensibly atemporal nature of the medium can be summarily deconstructed and reconstructed in time-space: the surface serving a dual role as both the beginning of the story as well as its end. Thus, it is the space in between, composed entirely of the unseen which makes the story real and three dimensional. If executed conscientiously by the artist, with fidelity to this principle from the ground up, can result in a fully formed story, complete with a beginning, middle and end. The point being its story can be conveyed and sensed, if not fully seen or understood. It holds a secret. Those who experience the work first hand may well sense its true dimension even though they can't quite see it yet and they don't understand it because it's sort of hidden. On a deeper level they know it's there, obscure, subtle but not invisible. To those who feel it shall reveal itself, within the void of things neither seen nor heard and then in the words of Van Gogh: “To some my secrets are no secrets.”
Central to my artistic ethos was an abiding preoccupation with particular individuals from no place in particular. 3 films from three different decades and genres became central obsessions. As these obsessions persisted I eventually realized that there was a connection between the 3 movies, albeit seemingly arbitrary at first glance. As it turns out, both “Last Days'' and “When a Stranger calls back” are the work of Portland based writer directors (Gus Van Sant and Fred Walton) while “Streetwise” was shot entirely on location on the streets of Seattle Washington. In other words, all signs point to the same remote geographical location. “Last Days' ' (2005) as seen through the eyes of cinematographer Harris Sevides, who specialized treatment of the film stock it turns out was intended specifically to suggest the Pacific NorthWest in spite of having actually been shot in the remote Hudson Valley of New York State. My attraction to “Last Days'' had virtually nothing to do with the characters or story and everything to do with the pictorial quality with which it was framed by cinematographer Harris Sevides and thus its effect on me was largely on my subconscious psyche permanently affecting my sense of light and magnetizing the points of my compass powerfully towards points Pacific. Meanwhile, amidst a similar North Western setting of Seattle, comes “Streetwise '' (1984), a documentary chronicling the lives of several homeless youths living on the streets of Seattle. Filmmaker Martin Bell was given the idea for the film from his wife, photographer Elen Mark who in the previous year had come to the Seattle on assignment for Life Magazine shooting pictures for an article on the city's homeless youths entitled “Streets of the Lost''. Mark having urged her husband to make the film following her encounter with the nine homeless youths ultimately featured in the finished film, the majority would go on to die untimely deaths in tragic circumstances whereas Rat and Tiny, the characters whose budding romance forms the films emotional center have managed to survive, where Tiny went on to have 10 children as a single mom and Rat, having grown weary of his rootless existence, settled down as a dedicated father. They have been subjects of my work since the discovery of the movie, namely in the painting entitled: “Rat and Tiny” from the “Archetype” series. Lastly, this large piece entitled “Julia and Jill”, a painting depicting Jill Johnson, a survivor of homicidal assault, is empowering a potentially defenseless young girl to defend herself from being a victim. Instead of giving in to learned timidities associated with her age and gender and inevitably can’t save her and render her defenseless, she is instead eschewing all conventions except those which will empower Jill to survive and do it herself recognizing that when push comes to shove, Jill has only Jill. It’s about putting the gift of survival in her hands.
If I were to break the structure of archetypes down to their essence, there would be only “the Hero” and “the Villain”, simply put, Ambition and Obstacle, the two opposing forces whose conflict creates the story. This entire concept is derived from Aristotle’s Poetics, which defines these archetypes as existing solely for the purpose of telling the story. In other words, notions of good and evil should more correctly be replaced with Antagonist & Protagonist.
I'm also heavily influenced by the Danish film making movement whose 1995 manifesto delineated 10 unbreakable rules which collectively serve to disallow the superficial tricks and trapping of the medium in favor of a “more pure” form of storytelling. Whoever, while the majority of the world views this movement as a reflection of its creators underlying agenda which supposedly seeks to discourage “overproduction” and embrace a kind of egalitarian minimalism. In reality, however, its creators intentions were far more shrewd in their true intent, which is actually a total red herring. Dogme only created these rules not to limit the artist's expression but rather to explode it as well in theory the soul of the artist bristles at anything which serves to limit their liberty and yet while the spirit of the artist is always free as it is safe inside the artist, the truth is that in the practical world in while we live, the artists true purpose is brought forth not in conditions of unlimited freedom but rather are activated to their maximum potential in an environment of mild tyranny. Also, when it came time for the creators of the Dogme manifesto to put their own laws into effect, the films that resulted did not result in the dogmatic following of strict rules but conversely became a master class in how to break the rules and get away with it. Afterall, the letter of the law is born out of the spirit of the law. A fact which more and more people fail to understand. It is a macabre thing to see people following laws without reason while forgetting the spirit which gave them rise. I won't sacrifice my creativity on the altar of commerce and blind obedience lest the divine gifts with which I and others have been blessed be sacrificed on the same altar and my life left meaningless and dreams worthless.
According to the original Imagist, artists are the antennae of the human race and yet ia important to remember that imagism does not merely refer to the presentation of pictures but rather to the manner of presentation. We are charged by finding meaning which we must do to the utmost degree. In the original founding tenets of Imagism, this was delineated by a program consisting of 3 parts which comprise the movement’s intellectual and emotional heart. (1) Direct treatment of “the thing” whether subjective or objective (2) To use absolutely no word that does not contribute to the presentation of “the thing” (3) As regarding rhythm: to compose in sequence of the musical phrase and not in the sequence of the metronome. The image is that which represents an intellectual and emotional complex in an instant of time. It is the directness of presentation manifested as a succession of creative moments rather than a continuous or sustained period of the development. These methods are used in an attempt to isolate a single image to reveal its essence. These 3 statements should not be considered as dogma but rather as the result of long contemplation. Finally, as Pound says: “It is better to present one image in a lifetime than to present voluminous works.”
