Archive for the ‘ Jay Hendrick ’ Category

Glueing Paintings Together

This morning I woke up and glued two paintings together. I glued the “painting” part of the painting to the other “painting” – meaning I squished two faces together. Or perhaps I smashed two windows together. Or perhaps they are infinity mirrors.

I think I would like to show this first one on a wall where the cradles of the paintings would be hung so that the object sticks out like a street sign, but this is a first draft.

IMG_1600

Infinity Mirror 2017 two acrylic on canvas paintings and glue 12x12x3″

IMG_1598

Two Paintings Glued Together 2017 acrylic, ink, graphite, and oil on panel 6x6x3″

I have been smashing these things together for some time – taking what might be considered singular endeavors and straining them through a screen of multiple to change their vocabulary. I think I have been trying to follow the thought processes of minimalism by reducing things to essences, but I think I am doing that by foregrounding that minimalist process. So maybe it is minimalism staring at minimalism.

One Pixel of a Jay Hendrick Painting 006, 2012, digital print, dimensions vary

One Pixel of a Jay Hendrick Painting 006, 2012, digital print, dimensions vary

This is an older piece from 2012 where I zoomed in 3200% onto one of my paintings and then took a screenshot then printed it out. This one is fascinating because it also looks like a Rothko.

I have also squished multiple paintings together in order to conflate the whole process and praxis of making itself. In The Average Color of 100 Paintings, I made one-hundred paintings and collected the slurry then put that slurry on a microscope slide, declaring that an average of the one-hundred paintings made.

IMG_1464

The Average Color of 100 Paintings 2015 acrylic on microscope slide in wooden box 8.5x5x1″ at the University of the District of Columbia

The arbitrary number of 100 has consistently been something I have used. 100 is just a number – or a larger number than 1. It seems to me to be an ambitious number to append to paintings. Some people spend 100 hours on a single painting. Some people might not even make 100 paintings in their lives. So what does it mean to squish 100 paintings together?

906B2E59-D1BE-4A2E-870E-39B9D1E89C12

100 Paintings 2015 one-hundred acrylic paintings on a 20×16” stretcher on easel 74x37x37” at the Taubman Museum in Roanoke, VA

 

 

 

Advertisements

Painting in Progress

I’m working on a 72×156″ painting. It is a bit like going back in time because I am using a painting made in 2011 as the source material. The painting in question, Who Needs Love When You Have a Paintbrush, is a good painting but it has issues. Back then I was really making kitchen sink paintings. The kitchen sink painting is when I add everything and the kitchen sink. So I try every little method I have to make the painting.

Who Needs Love When You Have a Paintbrushacrylic on canvas90x712013

Who Needs Love When You Have a Paintbrush, 2013, acrylic on canvas, 90×71″

From a design perspective, the painting is busy. There is unity and variety, but perhaps it leans too far into variety. There aren’t too many spaces to relax because the entire composition is frenetic. The issue is similar to Hieronymus Bosch’s Garden of Earthly Delights. The “earthly delights,” are many many verbs occurring in the painting. The action, the movement all adds up to a busy painting. It works for what Hieronymus Bosch wanted in the painting: stuff to the Nth degree.

6c7a29177325fc57f574dbbeb6f079126d6d0de5

Later paintings, like Grid 46, calmed down a bit. I gave the viewer some space to rest.

Grid 46acrylic and conte on canvas60 x 422012

Grid 46, 2012, acrylic and conte on canvas, 60″ x 42″

This current 72×156″ painting is resurrecting many of these previous issues. Each section could itself be a painting.

IMG_6377

painting detail

IMG_6373

IMG_6374IMG_6375

IMG_6382

And where the painting is currently:

IMG_6383

How Long Can You Beat a Dead Horse?

The Joke Workshop was interesting. Participants were two comedians, Christine Ferrera and Ben O’Brien.

I think I gained a leg up on my understanding of theory versus practice. I have been trying to write my way through the topic. I wanted to see if there were parallels between designing jokes and designing art. I wanted to see if these things could enter the classroom and help me affect the situation of co-learning in a more meaningful way.

In essence, I want to be a better teacher. I have observed that students know more than they have been led to believe and they know more than they are willing to believe. There are many issues that create this situation but I think it is due to how they have learned their entire lives and due to the unfortunate result of modernist activities driving people away from art.

I think it would be helpful to foreground this situation to them earlier rather than later. I think many students could gain quite a lot from taking agency with their own education. I think that elucidating that they know more than they thought would be helpful. With all that in mind, I embarked upon this experiment between art and comedy.

During the workshop we discussed Chris’ jokes. Chris and Ben jumped in with their practiced knowledge whereas I felt a bit bewildered. I didn’t really have too much access because they were digging into subtleties and I am not a stage performer nor a comedian.

We then looked at images from the New Yorker’s Caption Contest. We bounced around some ideas but landed on a topic Chris previously discussed with me: writing versus performing. They are different animals. Perhaps similar to how many visual artists find difficulty in writing about their work. There is a linguistic issue here. During this portion, Chris suggested that dealing with the caption contest might require a certain kind of skill set, and she suggested having improv actors to assist. So I might create a workshop were I interact with improv folks.

long-time-no-sea-all-im-saying-is-that-the-science-isnt-necessarily-conclusive-actually-were-in-the-same-boat

a recent caption contest image from the New Yorker. The winning caption was, “Long time no sea.”

We finished with looking at some art historical paintings as well as art history memes. We bounced around some ideas but the same kind of issues with the New Yorker caption contest arose with the art historical images.

16508399_10155074840010337_961361114099288691_n

a detail from a painting by Hieronymus Bosch. A possible caption: MFW a Trump voter says, “we don’t need no Obama health and dental care!”

I think there might be some future activities that could bounce off the workshop, like some kind of tweet writing workshop. Maybe it would be a podcast or a video. I think the purpose would be an intersection between comedy and pedagogy.

One of the collaborators, Ben O’Brien, discussed networking jokes through fiverr. I often overwork paintings to the point where I call them kitchen sink paintings – they include all my painting ideas and the kitchen sink. I overwork them because I don’t know when to stop. I overpaint because I doubt my own knowledge. My doubt takes the form of erasing the previous painting over and over. Networking the joke over and over might function in the same way. Maybe overworking the joke would cause it to fall apart. How long can you beat a dead horse?

wtdnnwe

Asking the question, “How long can you beat a dead horse?” Apparently the answer is, indefinitely. 

Another thought I had is perhaps there is a major difference between comedy and art: efficiency or function. Essentially, the joke needs to be funny or its purpose is thwarted. However, the art gesture/object need not have any purpose other than its making. There might not even need to be an object. There is “process art” but is there “process comedy?” Is there a point where comedy is the thing itself? I need to research theatre and comedy.

Continuing this thought, I was once offered a skateboard to use as a painting surface but there was the stipulation that it still be ridable. The efficiency of form influenced the content. I never did make that painting because it felt like some kind of external demand that had nothing to do with painting. If I made that skateboard painting I would have just been designing. However, in retrospect I was completely misguided because I have been designing around the “edge” of the painting for years.

I have been making paintings that are aware of the end of the painting in order to foreground that inconsistent modernist convention of the painting as a window. Form and content do not exist solely within the painting. The painting is not a universe. The painting hangs on a wall that exists in some kind of institution. That institution has its own values and thusly those values influence the painting and the viewing of that painting. There is no such thing as four neutral walls. The point is, I think there is no distance between form and content. I think this is a central tenant in my world view.

A good example of this pressing against the edge can be seen at Trestle Gallery in Brooklyn right now. The show, Introductions 2017 was curated by Julie Torres and is up through February 19.

15936630_10158082192250187_2139168756911594635_o

from Katerina Lanfranco’s instagram: A Many One Layer Lie, second from the left, at Trestle Gallery.

But my world view might be completely bat shit crazy. Further research into comedy might help me ride the horse off into the sunset rather than into a lake.

See more of Christine and Ben at their websites

http://www.christineferrera.net

http://benobrien.net

And check out Trestle Gallery at

http://www.trestlegallery.org

Metal Jesus

Is there an intersection between art and comedy?

Metal Jesus is pretty funny.

e5a4ff3a8e2b984707ced4b43dc9550c

A forgetful hoplite is funny.

6ea046f4c459115bff0df22f4f60b6cd

What the hell is going on with humor and art? Come by the Torpedo Factory tonight and help me figure that out.

The Joke Workshop is a free event taking place at 5-7 in Studio 12.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/post-graduate-studio-jay-hendrick-joke-workshop-tickets-31768059120

 

 

Goddamn Darlings

Artist John M. Adams came by the studio yesterday and we talked about process. We discussed how my piece, 100 Paintings, foregrounded both process and design. I think content is available via observing how the maker made the item. Likewise, John appreciated the aesthetics of the thing. So it looks good and thinks good.

dab4ffa6743f38287aa63cdb6d866da8

100 Paintings; 2015; one-hundred acrylic paintings on a 20×16” stretcher on easel; 74x37x37”

 

I think I have made many works that are trying to find some axis between looking good and thinking good. Process has been an important component of my work as a means at standing back from painting issues like re-presentaiton, the canon of art, and my skeptics world view. The stretching and re-stretching method of painting was a process based approach to get a leg up on the image – the front of the painting the viewer sees. Painting Paintings at Both Ends was a culmination and cousin of 100 Paintings.

2017-01-27-16-42-30-hdr

Painting Paintings at Both Ends, 2017, acrylic on canvas and two stretchers, 50×216″

John helped me realize that I have been bouncing between a content oriented process approach to making and rebounding back towards the most elemental origins of making: the mark. I have recently been just trying to make paintings that stand on their own sans my gimmicks of layering or exploding the painting.

The mark making goes back to some of my first interactions with sticks of charcoal. You put the charcoal on its side, then pivot, leaving its center axis on the page. By doing this, you can make a circle. Or you can slide the stick around and create a network of what looks like pipes. The recent painting is doing this same athletic gesture but with the brush.

untidy-pivot-2017-acrylic-on-canvas-28x28%22-780_1

Untidy Pivot, 2017, acrylic on canvas, 28×28″

 

I followed Untidy Pivot up with Sixteen Cornered Darling and an as yet to be titled painting yesterday…

2017-02-04-14-06-39

Sixteen Cornered Darling, 2017, acrylic on linen, 19×19″

 

2017-02-04-14-08-27

currently untitled, 2017, acrylic on linen, 19×19″

and today. This one might look black and white but it is actually very dark blue.

img_5944

A 42 Broken Arm or So, 2017, acrylic on canvas, 50×50″

 

I am already seeing a problem with these paintings (and why I have done the more process oriented works in the past): the paintings are pretty, sensuous, and goddamn darlings. So I need to think about them but they feel good.

See more of John M. Adam’s work at his poetically titled website:

thefullempty.com

 

Interlocuting Art and Comedy

My Joke Workshop begins 5-7pm this Thursday, February 9.

Participants are invited to assist in an exploration of both humor and learning with the purpose of finding parallels between humor and art. The workshop will be led by Post Graduate Torpedo Factory Resident,  Jay Hendrick and performance artist and comedian, Christine Ferrera.

Participants are invited to share in three prompted activities. The first activity invites contributors to bring their jokes that need work. It might be that the jokes require better phrasing, timing, or delivery. It might be that the jokes lack a punch line or perhaps there is only a punch line.

The second activity is a caption contest with visual prompts. Participants are invited to work together to create funny captions for pictures. Similar to the New Yorker’s caption contest.

16265664_1538683839493233_1640409263222984934_n

an early attempt creating a caption contest drawing

Finally, participants are invited to caption famous works of art.

black-in-deep-red

“Who put that dirty dish rag on the wall?!”

Cohosting with me is Christine Ferrera.

Christine Ferrera is an American triathlete, comedian and mother of eight (goldfish). She performs darkly absurd stand-up in clubs, conference rooms and crawl spaces internationally and has appeared as a peripheral character in several Nora Ephron films in her mind. Ferrera recently self-published a book about her decade-long correspondence with Starbucks Coffee Company titled, Starbux Diary: My 10-year Journey to Caffeinated Enlightenment, which was included in City Paper’s Top Ten Baltimore Books of 2015 and described as “Hilariously personal.” She has performed at the Pittsburgh Comedy Festival, Cleveland Comedy Festival, Chicago Women’s Funny Festival and will be featured on Wham City Comedy’s spring tour. She lives and works and eats and prays and loves in Baltimore, USA.

headshot

Christine Ferrera pondering the mysterious universe

See more of her work at:

http://www.christineferrera.net

image1

I am still working out what I am trying to attain, but the following describes the motivations for this workshop.

I teach art classes and one of the issues I encounter is that students believe they do not have access to art. However, they consistently show me that they do have access to art though often they lack a vocabulary to discuss it. For instance, I show them a bottom heavy design and they recognize that the design has something wrong with it. They recognize that the bottom heavy design pulls the eyes down. They may not a cultivated language to address the design, but they have some ability to see when something is askew.

If these students have more access to art than they perceived then I want find methods to make them aware of this. I am trying help them see that they have access to art thereby allowing them to set aside preconceived notions about the necessity of talent, skill, or book knowledge. These preconceived notions slow down the process of confidence in making. If a learner can recognize early in the process that they do have access to art, then they can develop habits that contribute to future successes in thinking and working.

Thusly I seek other areas of interest to parallel with art. For instance, I ask them to discuss their likes and dislikes of food. I think the design of food is a good analogy for design in art. We understand why we like or dislike certain foods. I think this understanding is a counter to the situation wherein a learner does not believe they have access to art. I think that this situation could also be examined through comedy.

We know what we think is funny. We have access to the design of comedy. I am curious if joke design can be analogous to visual design. I am curious about the logistics of the joke. I am also curious about situations that lend themselves to successful design of jokes and if those situations are similar to what occurs with art.

There is a strange thing that happens when a person becomes an artist, they begin to see the potential for art in any situation. It might come from many hours looking at a thing and drawing it. I wonder if comedians have similar experiences. Do comedians see potential for humor in any situation?

On Knowing and Apocalyptic Stupidity

I realized that the topic I am currently most interested in is very topical. It is a question about hands on knowing versus book learned knowing. Many of Trump’s cabinet picks lack specific knowing of their upcoming job. For instance, Betsy DeVos has no classroom training. She has no specific degree involving education, she has a bachelor’s in business admin and political science. The difference with her might be that she is an administrator yet lacking classroom experience would suggest a lack of specific, and necessary knowledge her upcoming position. She has no experience with knowledge associated with the job. 
 
This lack of knowing appears to be the conceptual premise behind Trump’s choices. Trump’s choices are unskilled knowers. For Trump, the concept must be that their business background provides all they need to know. Or perhaps Trump’s confidence lies in his choices’ lack of cultivated knowing which would grant them some kind of child-like or neutral, outsider perspective.
 
This is a subject that interests me because I am curious about whether or not an artist truly needs training. Should artists read and research? Or should artists just approach the subject with a lack of knowing in order to bring their “maverick,” or outsider perspective? If I want to make an truly interesting painting, should I make but one? Should I just approach the painting with blunt ignorance trusting in the power of chance and luck?
Regarding education, it seems doubtful that a lack of hands on training would be a boon. I know that from experience while trying to teach linear perspective. When I taught my first drawing class I was at a loss of how best to elucidate linear perspective in the form of language. I could show how to do it by drawing on their drawing or by doing a demonstration, but the complexities of transferring an inborn knowing via language was beyond my understanding. I have the capability to just see and then draw, so I don’t really use linear perspective except to just check things after the fact.
Now I have more experience and I know how better to discuss linear perspective. It is still difficult to teach but my experience has led to more successful methods in teaching. For instance I show them videos, discuss specific experiential knowledge, and I give them demonstrations.
So on one hand this is a post about the fitness of Trump’s pics but on the other hand it is also a question about the crux of how we can know and what might be the most beneficial methods to know. It follows that knowing by doing and researching other peoples’ attempts at knowing would produce a more complete knowledge of a subject. The presence of Trump’s Gaggle of Ignorants suggests a potential zeitgeist of some kind of confidence in a lack of knowledge. Or perhaps it is a fear of knowledge. Or perhaps a fear of what knowledge does.
This is a topic I will continue exploring in the classroom, at the easel, and in upcoming workshops. The next workshop is a Joke Workshop wherein I will observe the logistics of designing comedy.