|
Post by epicfai on Dec 12, 2010 16:42:07 GMT -8
i agree, highbrow, but it makes me wonder - why even bother if your work isnt even recognizable within the 'theme'? in this case i suppose attempting to shy as far away from the theme itself was a wise choice but having a general dislike for theme shows of this sort and a strong dislike of garfield in particular (i mean, really, wtf?) i really lose a bit of respect for these guys. but whatever, im probably taking it too seriously and even artists likely have to hustle a bit in this down economy.
|
|
|
Post by highbrow on Dec 12, 2010 17:42:05 GMT -8
Epicfai, all very valid points and one of the reasons I came to this board when it started was because I hoped one day to have a conversation so thank you in advance. I think by having your work in a show like this it is two fold, First as the artist Nate maybe opening his work up to a group of people who are not familiar. I am not someone who wears street wear clothing but know something about it and typically I would not see Nates work as holding an audience of people who would normally attend a hundreds event (I know there is always exceptions to the rule and I may be way off and mean in no way to offend anyone ) so now there is a large group of people who are now exposed to his work prior to this show. Secondly we are not sure it could be possible Nate is a huge fan of the cartoon and it was looked at as an honor, also the group of people showing in the show McGee Veca etc are people you dont get to typically show with I would assume so that could be it also.
I agree that I also am not a fan of the themed shows at all, I do own one themed painting from Mark brown which was a comm. for my wife so the theme was based on things she likes, other then that as I said previous i think it holds the artist back, as much as I want a McGee work I would pass on the Garfield one. So I guess there are always going to be things we dont know as to why artists do certain things, I think this show while themed shows maybe a bad idea this one was good exposure as opposed to others do we think?
|
|
|
Post by epicfai on Dec 12, 2010 19:10:47 GMT -8
good points, no doubt. is the hundreds a street wear clothing store? i didnt know that.
|
|
|
Post by highbrow on Dec 12, 2010 19:32:28 GMT -8
The Hundreds are a clothing brand that currently has three stores they own, LA, San Fran and NYC. also I know the blog www.thehundreds.com gets more visitors then god knows how many blogs, usually have very interesting things on there David Choe Thomas Han and various other posts from peoples home with great art collections. Toys and so on, I know they are very traffic heavy so worth checking out every know and then
|
|
|
Post by epicfai on Dec 12, 2010 20:32:08 GMT -8
cool - many thanks for the heads-up.
|
|
|
Post by sleepboy on Dec 12, 2010 23:25:32 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by highbrow on Dec 12, 2010 23:45:19 GMT -8
does anyone know what the McGee piece went for?
|
|
|
Post by cpk on Dec 15, 2010 23:38:47 GMT -8
highbrow, the site says $3,200.00
Question, if I am still thinking of Nate Frizzell's piece and have it bookmarked, does that mean I should buy it and blow my whole art buying plan for next year out of the water or should I stick to my plan of picking up another Amy Sol...
|
|
|
Post by highbrow on Dec 16, 2010 7:53:05 GMT -8
CPK I would say it is a hard choice. I not owning any Amy Sol work would lean more towards Frizzell, and as discussed this work does not make me feel like it is a Garfield work, only Garfield feel to me is it is in a theme show. It also is oil which is his new medium and everyone has said he has gotten better with each oil painting ( qoutes from people who saw his show at LeBasse and could tell what was painted early and late in the oil stage ) I would say at 2700 it is a fair buy, I would maybe check with Beau but I dont think he has anything available but worth a try.
|
|
|
Post by highbrow on Dec 16, 2010 12:50:43 GMT -8
CPK I just went on the hundreds site and it appears the work is gone, did you pull the trigger
|
|
|
Post by mistersmith on Dec 16, 2010 22:21:41 GMT -8
I was walking past the Hundreds store in SF with a few artists, and pointed out that window and mentioned how ridiculous I thought it was, and they all bitched me out. They all thought it was a totally rad idea, they all loved Garfield, I was shocked. Seems like a bunch of us are mystified by it, but I'm guessing the participants are freaking stoked -- the guys I was with would have been.
|
|
|
Post by cpk on Dec 16, 2010 22:39:52 GMT -8
Highbrow, wasn't me. Guess it wasn't meant to be Glad someone bought it though; Honestly, I was surprised that it hadn't sold the night of the show. But of course, maybe I've just got a thing for that cat he painted. Loved that giant outstretched paw!
|
|
|
Post by highbrow on Dec 16, 2010 22:54:19 GMT -8
I have to agree CPK sad you missed it but I am sure there will be another work you can spend your money on, glad someone grabbed it
|
|
|
Post by lowpro on Dec 17, 2010 0:11:01 GMT -8
I'll admit, I'm fascinated by the backlash to this show from the collector end of the spectrum. I fully realize these theme shows are increasingly a dime a dozen these days, with some being way worse than others. But with so many decent artists that come out in support of them, even if an argument could be made for it just being work and a potential payday, I'd think the artists were passionate enough about the concept and original characters for it not to be viewed as respectable, worthwhile endeavor for them. Personally, I'd never look down upon an artist that participated in these, within reason, as I'd truly hope there was just cause and the original art resonated with them to a substantial enough degree to produce something compelling.
Perhaps I just loved Garfield as a kid more than most, especially the TV cartoon for which this was the 15th anniversary of the original voice cast. If I were an artist that had made it at this point and could pick and choose my projects, I'd be happy to provide my art to an exhibit like this. If that would make my collectors question my decisions, so be it.
Don't get me wrong, I'd wager the scene and art produced by the artists within would be better off without these shows. I do agree that on the whole, they're gimmicks and are all attempting to tap into the collective nostalgia of the generation that supports this movement the most. As such, there clearly is a market for them and so they will exist, especially in the States..and even more so in the LA area.
Interesting to hear people's point of views if nothing else.
|
|
|
Post by highbrow on Dec 17, 2010 6:02:15 GMT -8
Lowpro I agree 100 percent,I also think this lineup doesnt seem to do theme'd works or shows for example Barry McGee come on, and Veca appears to work in themes so this was a perfect fit. I know two artists in the show who passed on oing another themed style show so I do believe they do pick very carefully
|
|
|
Post by mancub on Dec 17, 2010 8:13:34 GMT -8
I also agree with lowpro. I mentioned in an earlier post that I was asked to participate in the Hello Kitty show, I passed as I didn't feel the connection to my work but if it was a theme that I could relate to or felt a connection with I would gladly have participated. As you can see by Frizzell's piece they don't really need to be directly referenced, allowing for loose interpretations of the theme. Are these shows not definitive of what pop surrealist work is? Maybe because they are so organized it is hard for some people to look past the corporate side of the show? Though, there is a clear mocking undertone and rib towards pop culture in most of the works I have seen which to me screams pop surrealism. Not all of these artists are considered pop surrealist artists though which I believe is maybe why it is hard for some to receive it? Some of these artists are breaking away from their norm, which could make some it seem contrived and less true to the artist's style. That said, I haven't seen any that I would say that towards and I again agree with lowpro that most artists that aren't passionate about the subject or theme would likely have passed on it. CPK, too bad about the Frizzell piece, that paw made it's way past my armour and straight to my heart too! There will be dozens of new pieces in the new year that I'm sure you'll be just as happy to sink your teeth into. You'll know when you see the right one
|
|