I spend a lot of time thinking about dichotomies, dualities, and continuums. Every part of my process is about relationships, simply, taking two disjointed things and adding the thing that makes them all make sense together. I always keep in mind and avoid the obvious choice, as surprise and wonder are crucial parts of my process.
I always have several projects going on. I thought they were tools to get to new work in the middle, like a Venn diagram. But this semester I’ve confirmed that it’s traveling back and forth between them that helps me learn.
My abexish work is the most physically self-centered work I do. There, the opposing ingredients are formal elements & principles of design mixed with the raw uninhibited application and chance, how the paint moves due to gravity, momentum, pressure, etc. I work big, moving my body around. Using my whole body to move the paintings around. The composition must be dynamic from across the room but the details are more exciting to me. They last longer. I always change my clothes to paint.
Fashion design – taking completely random images that have perhaps nothing to do with clothes and interpreting those concepts into contemporary fashions. (ie abex+ old VA, Kline + Petite Prince+ Carytown, Betsey Johnson/Tinker Town) I use a lot of visual references, drawing from life, working on human proportion. Here the formal elements are almost a secondary ingredient to the concept. I work small, portable, pencils and markers, take it to the bar, anywhere, looking more than drawing. Books are easy to revisit, store, share.
Heads- faceless people- “fashion portraits” – it takes a very traditional concept and gives it a makeover. On one hand traditional portraiture depicts “who” the subject is. On the other hand the true origins of portraiture (deities aside) are in a way the ultimate “fashion portrait” because they were more about portraying wealth and possessions than the patrons personality. These use paper for magazines that are published to get middle class to want everything the upper class has. Even though the viewer does not know these people, who they are is irrelevant to what they represent.
______________
This obviously is nowhere near a final draft, it's just another draft of another approach. I feel like I am so close to saying what I mean (not here, but in my head) but then I go down one little tiny side path for a little second and the point just runs away, I'm not really frustrated, just still working.
I always have several projects going on. I thought they were tools to get to new work in the middle, like a Venn diagram. But this semester I’ve confirmed that it’s traveling back and forth between them that helps me learn.
My abexish work is the most physically self-centered work I do. There, the opposing ingredients are formal elements & principles of design mixed with the raw uninhibited application and chance, how the paint moves due to gravity, momentum, pressure, etc. I work big, moving my body around. Using my whole body to move the paintings around. The composition must be dynamic from across the room but the details are more exciting to me. They last longer. I always change my clothes to paint.
Fashion design – taking completely random images that have perhaps nothing to do with clothes and interpreting those concepts into contemporary fashions. (ie abex+ old VA, Kline + Petite Prince+ Carytown, Betsey Johnson/Tinker Town) I use a lot of visual references, drawing from life, working on human proportion. Here the formal elements are almost a secondary ingredient to the concept. I work small, portable, pencils and markers, take it to the bar, anywhere, looking more than drawing. Books are easy to revisit, store, share.
Heads- faceless people- “fashion portraits” – it takes a very traditional concept and gives it a makeover. On one hand traditional portraiture depicts “who” the subject is. On the other hand the true origins of portraiture (deities aside) are in a way the ultimate “fashion portrait” because they were more about portraying wealth and possessions than the patrons personality. These use paper for magazines that are published to get middle class to want everything the upper class has. Even though the viewer does not know these people, who they are is irrelevant to what they represent.
______________
This obviously is nowhere near a final draft, it's just another draft of another approach. I feel like I am so close to saying what I mean (not here, but in my head) but then I go down one little tiny side path for a little second and the point just runs away, I'm not really frustrated, just still working.
No comments:
Post a Comment