In my new official role as art blog commentator I would like to say that this is great.I find the central pink orb like shape works better than if you placed a symmetrical pompom in the center. The lopsidedness of the shape works well with the whole. The drawing, the blue, orange, and black lines work well with the three dimensional elements, the unevenly spread out pompoms that are varied in size. Using pompoms of various sizes and colors works well because it keeps the eyes moving. When you are making these are you thinking strictly about formal qualities of the work or are there any associations you wish the final work to conjure up in the viewer?
There is definitely something gaudy and sumptuous about these collages. They conjure up images of make-up, jewelry, cosmic events, rich desserts. Certain lines feel like smears of lipstick and the glitter conjure up images of seventies disco culture. The shapes bring to mind planets and galaxies and galactic turmoil. The glitter and pompoms also suggest clothing. But I would say that in the end the collages feel formalist, mostly concerned with what goes on on the surface and not with generating associations.
Recovered memories of Missy putting on her lipstick are at least as good as "the real art crit." AND, I see it too! I think the black is her hair . . .
Um, I am not familiar with that particular gloryhole, but . .. hm, I was going to say that all gloryhole associations are welcome. But do I really want to say that? Isn't that what we have your blog for?
Also, all associations must be from 1985 New Haven. Do you think that will narrow my readership? My commentership? (Mom, you gotta step up.)
good eats: I find the phrase "quantum valences" offensive. Yes, mainly because I don't know what it means, but not ONLY. Please do not use it on my blog.
EAG, I never thanked you for your gaudy sumptuous, in the end formalist comment. Thank you. I'm sure you'll read this shortly. It's only four and a half months later.
Collage, 4" x 5"
In my new official role as art blog commentator I would like to say that this is great.I find the central pink orb like shape works better than if you placed a symmetrical pompom in the center. The lopsidedness of the shape works well with the whole. The drawing, the blue, orange, and black lines work well with the three dimensional elements, the unevenly spread out pompoms that are varied in size. Using pompoms of various sizes and colors works well because it keeps the eyes moving. When you are making these are you thinking strictly about formal qualities of the work or are there any associations you wish the final work to conjure up in the viewer?
ReplyDeletereminds me ever-so-slightly of Missy putting her lipstick on at Atticus
ReplyDelete-good eats
EAG -- I love your new official role. But no more blog for you?
ReplyDeleteIn answer to your question -- trade secret. Sorry.
good eats -- That is kind of freaking me out . . . I think because I see what you mean.
There is definitely something gaudy and sumptuous about these collages. They conjure up images of make-up, jewelry, cosmic events, rich desserts. Certain lines feel like smears of lipstick and the glitter conjure up images of seventies disco culture. The shapes bring to mind planets and galaxies and galactic turmoil. The glitter and pompoms also suggest clothing. But I would say that in the end the collages feel formalist, mostly concerned with what goes on on the surface and not with generating associations.
ReplyDeleteassociations are all I know -- when it comes to these pieces; not too good at the real art crit.
ReplyDelete-good eats
The bundops speak to me, as always!!
ReplyDelete-good eats
Recovered memories of Missy putting on her lipstick are at least as good as "the real art crit." AND, I see it too! I think the black is her hair . . .
ReplyDeleteIngrate!
ReplyDeleteOkay it reminds me of the gloryhole found in one of the stalls of the men's room in the Ulster Travel Plaza. Is that better?
Um, I am not familiar with that particular gloryhole, but . .. hm, I was going to say that all gloryhole associations are welcome. But do I really want to say that? Isn't that what we have your blog for?
ReplyDeleteAlso, all associations must be from 1985 New Haven. Do you think that will narrow my readership? My commentership? (Mom, you gotta step up.)
My mom doesn't know about my blog but she enjoys my sick sense of humor so she would probably guffaw at the crass content.
ReplyDeleteI'll give you an example. For Halloween I sent her a link to this video:
ReplyDeleteand youtube had this as a top listing under the search "Halloween videos for kids!"
That's pretty funny. OK. Now I'm extra late and it's all your fault .. .
ReplyDeleteI miss one comment thread, one time.....
ReplyDeleteI have lowered the level of discourse by several quantum valences. I RULE!!
ReplyDelete-good eats
Carla: Not too late!
ReplyDeletegood eats: I find the phrase "quantum valences" offensive. Yes, mainly because I don't know what it means, but not ONLY. Please do not use it on my blog.
I wonder if there's a curtain store somewhere named "Quantum Valances."
ReplyDeleteOh. Wow. This is a great way of getting my number of comments up. Don't you think? No one will notice they're all me.
ReplyDeleteI noticed.
ReplyDeleteBut most people are not as eagle-eyed as you, EAG. The others won't notice, watch.
ReplyDeleteAnother comment.
ReplyDeleteYou're the best. Top 65, anyway.
ReplyDeleteNumber 65, number 65, number 65! Yeah!
ReplyDeleteEAG, I never thanked you for your gaudy sumptuous, in the end formalist comment. Thank you. I'm sure you'll read this shortly. It's only four and a half months later.
ReplyDelete