Above all, the topic that really grabbed my attention was that of artists deciding whether or not to sign their finished works. The dilemma goes as such: on the one hand, the artist choosing to not insert his or her signature or watermark in the art piece allows the art to speak for itself. On the other hand, signing the painting is a direct expression of the artist’s individuality.
The reason the topic of signing or not signing art grabbed my attention was because I have always faced the same dilemma with my own art. During high school, when my favorite medium became acrylic painting, I would fill every inch of the canvas with paint and realized at the end that a signature would cover my artwork, and in a small but significant way, it would alter the very essence (feel) and composition of the art piece. When I finally decided to sign one of my paintings, I would cringe every time I saw the signature like it was an unwanted eyesore. It was just a disgusting, self-aggrandizing advertisement of the self; it did nothing but take away from the intent of the painting. I did not plan the composition around including a signature.
However, like artistic styles, opinions are expected to change and evolve over time; I now sign nearly all of my pieces. I still don’t like it, and don’t fully know why I do it. It is just the case that the first (and only) person that commissioned me to make him a painting freaked out when I said I don’t sign my art, because he saw it as essential to asserting my individuality and self-worth (he was an extremely hardcore Ayn Rand enthusiast). Since then, I started to sign my art. I still wonder: what is the worth of a signature on a painting? Sometimes it does feel good to write my signature because I like my signature, it lends an 'authentic' look, and it gives me credit for the work. Other times, it still bothers me because I wonder if putting a 'self advertisement' is really worth the cost of taking away from the intended composition and meaning of the painting. Maybe I am selling out? My answer: sometimes I feel I am and sometimes I feel I am not, because my opinion on the aesthetic/creative value of signatures change when applied to different works of mine (I'm also very wishy-washy on this topic in general). Ultimately, I have come to the conclusion that the definition of selling out is based on neither how much money an artist makes off of their work, nor the nature of their work, but on the act of willfully doing something that sacrifices his or her own creative vision for the sake of something the artist believes will make the art worse. This is something solely for the artist to decide, and nobody else because only the artist can know his or her own creative vision. And if the artist embraces the 'sacrifice' (as others label it), in reality, nothing about the art is sacrificed at all.
Another focus of Vandenburgh’s lecture was how some drawings intend to show evidence of the human touch in the form of fine pencil strokes. This is something the late Margaret Kilgallen, the artist we are studying this week, appreciated. Kilgallen uses clean-cut, simple strokes and autumn color schemes in her art that result in flat, straight-forward art pieces that have an indie feel to them. Themes that stay consistent in her art are her personal heroines (strong, independent women), art done for the sake of connecting to others, and a great emphasis on hand-crafting (no machines). Kilgallen says about handmade signs:
“On any day in the Mission in San Francisco, you can see a hand-painted sign that is kind of funky, and maybe that person, if they had money, would prefer to have had a neon sign. But I don't prefer that. I think it's beautiful, what they did and that they did it themselves [Art 21: Margaret Kilgallen]. ”
I agree that hand-made items hold a great amount of value, especially since it is so rare to find items during this century that are custom-made rather than mass-produced. As Walter Benjamin would phrase it, the cult artifact has a unique aura that can never be replicated [Art Theory for Beginners, 127]. As a matter of fact, it having a signature will not matter any more or less if there are a million other signatures on a million other copies of that same art piece.
The text Art Theory for Beginners was a very informative yet an easy read that helped me understand all of the jargon associated with art and the art community (which would otherwise take me a few days to look up on the internet). A particular topic that caught my interest is minimalism [Art Theory for Beginners, 134].
I am absolutely fascinated with minimalism because I have a love-hate relationship with it, but have never actually researched it until now. Almost all of my artwork has to do with using crazy rainbow colors and elaborate, over-the-top-detailed elements in them; minimalism fascinates me because even though it isn’t my favorite style of art, I appreciate the straight-forward ‘what you see is what you get’ approach. I’ve also learned that the fewer amounts of elements an artist has to work with (colors, shapes, objects) in an art piece, the harder it gets to create something beautiful and balanced without killing the movement.
A feminist view of minimalism in 1990 from Anna Chave that took me by surprise was her belief that minimalism was a celebration of dominance, power, control and masculinity. She based this on the fact that the shapes and elements used in minimalism during her time was what she believed to be cold, 'steely', and "like the unyielding face of the father [Art Theory for Beginners, 137]". I disagree with her association between males and minimalism, because in labeling those negative traits as 'masculine' traits, she herself is enforcing unwanted stereotypes; stereotypes that may be completely void in a man, but very well present in a woman. Kilgallen's want for women to be valued for what they accomplish rather than what body they were born in can only be achieved when we personally decide to stop enforcing negative stereoptypes of any sex or gender, in our art as well as in all other outlets of our lives.
Works Cited
Art 101 Lecture Series (Winter 2011): Laura Vandenburgh
Art Theory for Beginners
Art21: Margaret Kilgallen
[http://www.pbs.org/art21/artists/kilgallen/]
Right click on images for sources.
Great post. A bit scattered at times, but you pull it together in the end. I love that discussion about the signature-- really compelling.
ReplyDeleteNice job with all of the various components and making connections.