Johns, Biography and Content

Just before heading to SOVA for the holidays, I finished Jill Johnston's book on Jasper Johns, Privileged information. I had some trouble getting through the book due to some stylistic issues.  

Style issues aside, this book deepened my appreciation and affinity for Johns’ work. Central to Johns’ method is the stripping of meaning from the objects he has depicted, leaving flags, targets, numbers or whatever as simply compositional elements. Basically he would say, “What you see is what you get.” Possibly beginning with the crosshatch paintings in the 70s and more obvious by the earlier 80s, Johns was using more coded information that suggested actual subject matter and content. These paintings were dense and somewhat impenetrable from critical perspective. While some recognized certain imagery (Munch, Grunewald, etc) buried in these works, Johns would not discuss what the images were or what they may mean to him personally. Johns followed Duchamp’s theory that the viewer completes the art. I’ve always taken this to mean that it is not for the artist to explain what a picture is about, whatever the spectator gets from a piece is completely valid.  It is also not important to know any biographical information of an artist to experience the work. In the end, there is the work and the audience, nothing more.

Some artists make their work to try to explain themselves to the world. I have always made work for myself with the hopes that other would find them interesting. Like Johns, I’m not interested in revealing myself to the world yet it is hard not to use personal symbols or coding in my work. Moving to a more minimalist has provided some distance from discussions of “content.” I’m happy enough to reveal that the work is rooted in contemporary music that generally leads to pleasant conversations about music, steering clear of “meaning.”

For Guston (Books)

Last Spring, I spent a few weeks with my right arm in a sling then about 6 weeks of physical therapy. During this period, I spent a lot of time reading, especially the writings and statements of Philip Guston and his friend Morton Feldman. It was fascinating to note that Guston's views never changed much, even when he made the "shocking" break from abstraction to figuration. I was drawn to his use of a limited amount of everyday objects and their placement on the canvas. Watching film of Guston at work also inspired me to be more direct in my painting, getting it down quickly. Guston was described as the best read high school drop out ever. I decided to paint a stack of books since this was an image Guston painted over and over again, plus it is a nice play on my last name. Well, the direct thing didn't work out though this was record time for me at around one month to produce. I had already begun work on a couple of other paintings but I realized that I was being drawn to the background as much as to the pile of books. This was more obvious in the next couple of paintings where there is only a single object depicted. I am intrigued by having this celebration of everyday battle and perhaps lose to the empty background. This is more pronounced in the work that follows.

Getting It Back

Wow, I haven't posted since April. In this time I have been doing what jazz musicians would call "woodshedding." I've been reading a ton, looking at a lot of art. I've gone through about 5 weeks of physical therapy on my right arm after a few weeks in a sling. Things are much, much better but there are still issues. I try to keep my whining to a minimum since others, say, Chuck Close, have worked through far worse.

I really immersed myself in the world of Philip Guston and it is really showing in the work. Part of that world includes the work of the composer Morton Feldman. From Guston, I take the idea of working with the everyday to create enigmatic works. One thing I could not emulate is the immediacy of his work. He would paint and scrape and paint and scrape until the work would tell him that it was done. I started trying to free myself up in that manner but it just did not work for me. I laugh because I am making work that is directly in line with his but his own words would suggest that he would not like what I do.

Guston was particularly interested with placement of objects on the picture plane. This is a big concern for me and is deeply informed by the minimal works of Feldman, where very spare compositions are constructed with only a few carefully placed notes/sounds.

I've completed a painting and a drawing of books that take a cue from Guston. Books are a huge part of my life and use of them as subject matter is not intended to be a play on my last name. I own tons of books, read as much as possible, I worked in a book store in college and my wife worked in libraries for more than 15 years. I've also been working on shoes, particularly a pair of Doc Martens I wore when I worked in a retail store, on my feet for 50-60 hours a week. They were beautiful shoes that did not let me down. Guston obviously painted many shoes and I don't think our reasons are that far off in exploring this subject.