its curious. i feel like i've had moments like Weatherford explains, where all of these elements come together and its an amazing visual and maybe you take a picture of it...but then you try to remake that, or remake that feeling, and it doesn't happen...but that's because making the leap to adding the element of light as direct as she does is something i'd never have the confidence to do. does that make sense? so, i like the work. cuz it creates this otherness that I can't find in painting traditionally - yet - its also suspect, because there is this addition that seems so otherworldly (or outside the world of painting) that the novelty of the addition of the neon tubes feels performative. i think, it really would have to be something that I see in person before I could make a decision if I liked it or not. its very LA. i do like the brushwork. i like the size. i like the looseness and the breathiness of it and again, I feel that california cool vibe in it. i think she won.
i dont know....most of the time i feel that adding the neon is like a scapegoat for knowing how to get the paint to behave. just a cheap parlor trick to make up for lack of painting skill. i do like the painting underneath the neon. i agree with you about trying to get back to some feeling that you captured and its almost always impossible. i kinda would like to see her paint the neon and then watch the paint catch on fire when it gets turned on. and capture the burn marks on the canvas
That is a great image you have painted Brian of the painting catching on fire with neon. At first glance, I think these paintings speak to more of a fascination with putting together two wildly different materials, except that isn't neon tubes made of some kind of gas inside that reacts with electricity? Maybe I am being too nice to these paintings, but I think that they gaseousness of the neon and the fluidity of her paint have an interesting atmospheric quality that I think relates to how we experience old Route 66 neon signs. That experience is one that is romanticized in paintings of traveling the road, and also the commercialization and simplification of something more complex. I may be way off base, but I wouldn't buy one of these because of the use of technology, and also because I find the neon distracts from the painting-- then the only places I can see this piece living is in some modern house with rustic overtones of Santa Fe soft dirt walls (and lots of blank space). Perhaps just throw in some of Richard Tuttle's works, too.
yes. interesting. I see these in LA absolutely...I see them in California Hills houses of Hollywood producers with infinity pools and terraces that stretch menacingly over the desert...basically a big "fuck you to water-use cuz I'm rich attitudes", and loft apt....totally Bright Lights, Big City, & Less Than Zero. Bahhh!
you first
ReplyDeleteits curious. i feel like i've had moments like Weatherford explains, where all of these elements come together and its an amazing visual and maybe you take a picture of it...but then you try to remake that, or remake that feeling, and it doesn't happen...but that's because making the leap to adding the element of light as direct as she does is something i'd never have the confidence to do. does that make sense? so, i like the work. cuz it creates this otherness that I can't find in painting traditionally - yet - its also suspect, because there is this addition that seems so otherworldly (or outside the world of painting) that the novelty of the addition of the neon tubes feels performative. i think, it really would have to be something that I see in person before I could make a decision if I liked it or not. its very LA.
Deletei do like the brushwork. i like the size. i like the looseness and the breathiness of it and again, I feel that california cool vibe in it. i think she won.
i dont know....most of the time i feel that adding the neon is like a scapegoat for knowing how to get the paint to behave. just a cheap parlor trick to make up for lack of painting skill. i do like the painting underneath the neon. i agree with you about trying to get back to some feeling that you captured and its almost always impossible. i kinda would like to see her paint the neon and then watch the paint catch on fire when it gets turned on. and capture the burn marks on the canvas
ReplyDeleteoooo! I like that idea!
DeleteThat is a great image you have painted Brian of the painting catching on fire with neon. At first glance, I think these paintings speak to more of a fascination with putting together two wildly different materials, except that isn't neon tubes made of some kind of gas inside that reacts with electricity? Maybe I am being too nice to these paintings, but I think that they gaseousness of the neon and the fluidity of her paint have an interesting atmospheric quality that I think relates to how we experience old Route 66 neon signs. That experience is one that is romanticized in paintings of traveling the road, and also the commercialization and simplification of something more complex. I may be way off base, but I wouldn't buy one of these because of the use of technology, and also because I find the neon distracts from the painting-- then the only places I can see this piece living is in some modern house with rustic overtones of Santa Fe soft dirt walls (and lots of blank space). Perhaps just throw in some of Richard Tuttle's works, too.
ReplyDeleteyes. interesting. I see these in LA absolutely...I see them in California Hills houses of Hollywood producers with infinity pools and terraces that stretch menacingly over the desert...basically a big "fuck you to water-use cuz I'm rich attitudes", and loft apt....totally Bright Lights, Big City, & Less Than Zero. Bahhh!
Delete