|
Post by drevil on Jan 4, 2013 15:14:59 GMT -8
Heron Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Jan 4, 2013 15:14:10 GMT -8
My collection is moving in a different direction than I thought it might, so the following are available if anyone is interested. For sale at my app. cost (OBO) is the following: Kevin Peterson - Red Winged Blackbird - $800 Kevin Peterson - Blue Heron - $800 Wei Wei Serpentine Gallery Print - $600 Shipping, packaging, fees, etc. are the buyer's responsibility. PM me with questions, etc. Kevin Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Jan 3, 2013 20:25:49 GMT -8
Love the KAWS and Falls x 2. I don't get the appeal of the Aurel though. Congrats on all of them regardless.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Jan 1, 2013 16:58:59 GMT -8
Taking the Warhol comparison/contrast farther, here is a quoted section from the most-excellent book 'Pop Art: A Continuing History': "...Warhol found a much simpledr and more direct way of replicating an image by using a photo-mechanical process, that of screen printing. He applied the process first to paintings representing rows of dollar bills or two-dollar bills, ordering a screen to be made from a hand-drawn facsimile of a bank-note (as the laws on counterfeiting forbade their photographic reproduction) and then using it as a standard unit to be printed one by one on a strict grid system. For Warhol, as for the minimalists and other artists during and after this period, the grid itself - as a pure expression of serial repetition this dispensed with relational methods of composition - functioned as a sign for modernism in the context of abstract and representational paintings alike. The procedure used by Warhol in the dollar-bill paintings was rich in irony: not only was he literally printing money, matching the technique to its subject, he was also drawing attention to the status of art itself as a mere commodity, 'money on walls'. The buying and selling of contemporary art, and especially of American art, was for the first time becoming big business in New York. Other artists continued to speak of their transcendental and spiritual ambitions. Warhol, by contrast, blandly but shockingly avowed the more worldly monetary transactions that others cared about just as passionately but preferred not to admit to publicly. What may have seemed at the time to be cynicism on Warhol's part could as accurately be described as brutal honesty." Anyone find relation to the Penny Paintings? After reading how Nick himself views these, no. We can sit around projecting meaning and importance on these for years. However, you can probably do that with most art. Honestly, after reading how Nick thinks about these I have lost most interest. I want artists to work hard. But more importantly I want artists that think harder about what they are doing and what they are trying to accomplish. I don't see that here. I see a young man with some talent (or plain luck) meandering around looking for direction. Maybe in 5-10 years. Or maybe never. Happy New Year all.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Jan 1, 2013 13:39:13 GMT -8
These resale agreements are fairly ridiculous. Artists would be better off just saying: you sell within x years = no more art directly from me (or my representing galleries) ever. More direct and actually enforceable.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 26, 2012 11:51:21 GMT -8
I could see the pennies in these works as stand-ins for people in a city like New York, and especially non-wealthy. All packed in tightly in rows, all with slight variation but basically the same, and all treated equivalent to their economic status - meaning they are practically worthless. To me, that would bring these works around to be explored in relation to something like Ai Weiwei's sunflower seeds. Maybe. I'm still not sure why he would pick pennies as opposed to anything else though. My understanding with the Wei Wei seeds is that they have a strong historical message and connection via how Mao projected himself as the sun in Chinese society and his citizenry as sunflowers. Not sure I see a parallel here that would instill similar significance to pennies in particular.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 26, 2012 10:59:19 GMT -8
And regarding the Verdi Gris: My concern would be that I am eventually left with a blank canvas. How well does it bind to the cloth? Will gravity eventually win out? Does it actually stain it or integrate into it at all? If I bought one I would definitely consult a professional archivist for advice at some point.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 26, 2012 10:47:38 GMT -8
Not to mention the throw away negative garbage that gets posted all too often. Your analysis is an interesting one, although you lost me with the flag burning comparison. No analysis is required to know what emotion that comes from. Or does that mean that every artist that's ever used a 'real' US flag in their work is guilty of the same desecration? But back to your original point, I was told by his gallery in London that much of his work is autobiographical and that the pennies represent his feelings towards living in such a dense populous as NYC. Nick is mixed race Chinese so perhaps there's an element of alienation in there. Who knows? Interesting to hear his take. Though it leaves me at a complete loss as to why he chose pennies.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 26, 2012 8:40:40 GMT -8
Let me just clarify a couple things before people start making unjustified assumptions. It will also provide, I think, a more full disclosure.
I really like the pennies and would likely own one if not for a "strange" interaction with Isaac at Still House. Ultimately I am happy that the opportunity was "taken away" from me as the only one I could get was too small and overpriced for the work of an unreped artist, IMO. I also had concerns about the ability of these to hold together over time as they are ultimately just chemical deposits on cloth, I think. Congrats to those who scored big ones before the window closed though. Size is very important here.
Also, I am a big fan of free speech. Just stating my read of these canvases, which happened to come out as it did above when I approached them as objectively as possible. Sorry if I offended anyone, just think this forum needs more analysis and less of the "I love it" garbage that is often shared without saying WHY.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 26, 2012 7:28:55 GMT -8
There is, IMO, a very fine line between damaging iconic symbols of America and criticizing America. Flag burning may be protected by the First amendment as free speech, but most Americans are still very uncomfortable with it (to say the least). Same analysis applies here IMO.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 25, 2012 6:10:16 GMT -8
I will take a stab at some "differences" that I see with the pennies.
To me the Warhol dollar canvases shown above are really similar on some levels. They are, on one level, grids of US money imaged onto canvas. Two obvious differences are the subject ($1 bills v pennies) and imaging method (silkscreen v oxidation). I don't really see any other major, physical differences.
Taking the subject. I suppose that the meaning can be fairly different between the two. D has imaged the pennies to the point where they have become meaningless and people start seeing them as a whole or at least large groupings/globs. Darm has made images of pennies themselves meaningless via art in much the same way as they have become meaningless in society as a whole, as alluded to by Mose above. I imagine that the read of the Warhol canvas would not likely be the same by most or all people.
Is this a reasonable read? Is this even important? I don't know.
Do I want a canvas on my wall that physically degraded US currency to make an aesthetic statement about the meaninglessness of that same US currency? Seems pretty anti -American to me and also an entirely different outcome to me than the Warhol again (who I have heard was a big fan of money).
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 24, 2012 23:18:35 GMT -8
Really nice (and epic) post. It is always really interesting to me to hear how current work is similar to past work. Even more interesting is hearing and thinking about the differences that move the current work beyond the past work though. This, I think, is the much more difficult analysis to undertake. I am also truly interested to hear some thoughts on the magnet things though. Seems the next logical step is a coloring book. . I kid, I kid. (No pun intended.)
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 24, 2012 13:23:39 GMT -8
Yes we get it. You don't like art that you perceive as being easy to produce. Message received loud and clear. Anyhow, another process photo of a penny canvas.... Well, you have to admit that it IS easy to produce. Looks like quite the penny canvas production line in the photo.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 22, 2012 19:12:49 GMT -8
True. But Dietch seems to be the main one if the 3 speaking for the arts side of things in that list. Regardless of the recent belly aching by people about his role at MOCA he still seems to be held in high regard by many artists and collectors. Not to mention the fact that he has a lead role in a top museum in a major art market. So I should buy this crap just because some guy I never met thinks the artist has potential? Re-read the quoted passage, then re-read your question and think about why you missed the entire point. Good luck.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 20, 2012 16:47:20 GMT -8
I think the whole Forbes 30 under 30 thing can be taken with a grain of salt. It's definitely a cool little group to be included in, but the whole list is made from 3 judges. Hardly something to bet the farm on or collect for that specific reason. True. But Dietch seems to be the main one if the 3 speaking for the arts side of things in that list. Regardless of the recent belly aching by people about his role at MOCA he still seems to be held in high regard by many artists and collectors. Not to mention the fact that he has a lead role in a top museum in a major art market.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 20, 2012 16:06:52 GMT -8
If this guy gets "big" anytime soon based on his output to date I will lose all faith in the art world.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 19, 2012 15:21:52 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 12, 2012 8:07:49 GMT -8
Cha Ching.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 7, 2012 6:17:40 GMT -8
I wasn't speaking in a literal sense. Seriously though, ever since I saw the pennies on here I have wondered in the back of my mind if they were a fluke. The pennies are much better than I would ever expect from a 24 year old. I will wait to reserve ultimate judgement, but simply state for now that these magnet things are the first indication that they were. To me at least. Time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Dec 7, 2012 5:31:29 GMT -8
Seems like something I would consider hanging in my child's bedroom if someone wasn't insisting it was art ( and charging art prices rather than toy prices). Meh for me. Pennies were much better IMO. This looks like a step in the wrong direction.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Nov 30, 2012 15:27:58 GMT -8
Should be a favorite among pedophile collectors. Good luck with the sales!
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Nov 17, 2012 19:00:16 GMT -8
Saw pics of the Sam Falls pieces heading down with American Contemporary. They looked great and are highly recommended. Similar to the one bought by Lindemann, if you are into that sort of thing. Have fun all.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Nov 16, 2012 18:39:39 GMT -8
In other words, it is a crude attempt at market manipulation. As afroken stated.
If you have a fold canvas you now have a Mugrabi backed floor on the value.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Nov 11, 2012 21:12:13 GMT -8
Went for less than $2.5k. Cheap compared to gallery pricing.
|
|
|
Post by drevil on Nov 10, 2012 20:08:42 GMT -8
Agree with Mose here. What is up with this mod? You should say you were wrong and move on. IMO.
|
|