Artist 2/20: Stephen Gammell

As a child, a series of three books were published entitled "Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark" written by Alvin Schwartz. The stories ranged from light and sophmoric, to mildly humorous, to down-right descriptively gruesome. Now the one thing that was constant and has remained to haunt me though the years was the unapologetic, scarring illustrations of Stephen Gammel.

Thumbing through the book, his style is so painfully clear and effective. Every character or scene whether intended to be frightening or neutral all share the same look. Each image is sketched as though they're covered with dirty hair, slime or stringy blood. Due to the black and white medium our minds are left to wander even more.

Along with the grittiness, many of his images are gross distortions of what we might expect in reality. An over sized head, an elongated face, a smile resembling broken glass - all of it is rendered so well that the suspension of believe is shortened and the audience believes they could see the horrors on the page in real life. A particular piece that scared the heebie-jeebies out of me was his illustration of the "White Wolf". While the story merely pertained to a ravenous wolf the picture elevates the creature to an entirely nightmarish quality. Its crooked eyes, eye sockets and teeth that looks like their made from broken glass, deformed nose create what not only loosely resembles a wolf but there's a hauntingly crazed human quality to it.

Why does this appeal to me? While I admittedly have a similar dark-side to some of my work that may occasionally emerge, Stephen Gammell taught me a number of things. One being the power of suggestion, while it may not be entirely abstract, his methods are easily applicable. Secondly, his rendering techniques and use of dark and light shapes add to the depth and tangibility of his images. In essence whenever I try to create a 'scary' or 'disturbing' image, more often than not, Stephen Gammell's is the look I aim for.

Artist 1/20: Edvard Eriksen

Edvard Eriksen (1876-1959)

My first artist could easily be considered a one-hit-wonder in that most of his work doesn't get much notoriety.  However, one of his pieces has been labeled an official national landmark of Denmark. I am referring to Danish sculptor Edvard Erikson.

The Hope 1904

Falling very much into the style of Classicism, Eriksen actually was one of the first artists to popularize the use of a poetic title to convey the story and emotions of his work. One such example is of a young woman affectionately clutching her child simply entitled "The Hope", bought by the State Museum of Art in 1904. 

The Statue of the Little Mermaid 1913

Despite this artist's obscurity, one particular sculpture, "The Little Mermaid", in Copenhagen remains recognized all over the world.

First off, this sculpture moves me with its utter serenity. Unlike many sculptures involving living subjects she isn't caught in the middle of a sudden, unfinished action. And while other more classical pieces are in a dignified but unnatural pose, she is sitting in a manner that looks like it's not only comfortable but that she could be there for a lengthy span of time without moving.

But the one thing that is truly unique about this sculpture, and that I've never seen before, is that the subject is engaged with her real-life surroundings. An inanimate object is reacting to the living shore below her. Most 3-dimensional classical artwork is disconnected from the real world, contained in it's own little bubble only occasionally breaching the fourth wall by potentially staring at the viewer (depending on where the viewer stands in relation to the artwork). If a subject has no known context and its environment doesn't support a story, the character's thought process is entirely speculative. Here, we don't need to know the title or story to understand the relationship between a mermaid and the sea.

However, should you be familiar with the story of Hans Christian Anderson's story of "The Little Mermaid", the emotional implications of this sculpture are even more potent. This is the moment she is contemplating whether to leave the sea, her home, and risk everything to be with a man. As an audience, we know that she will never return alive.

Eline Erkison

The Sufferer 1901

The Recollection 1915, The Grief 1914, The Love 1917
At King Christian's and his wife Louise's IX Sarcophagus

But if anything, the driving emotion that seemed to have influenced Edvard Erikson the most was love. His works and their titles (i.e. The First Grief, The Recollection, The Hope, The Judgement) all seem to stem from it. And indeed Eriksen apparently had a wonderful love life with his beloved wife Eline who stood in as the model for all his female nudes. Perhaps she was the only one who'd undress for him...or perhaps it was because in his eyes, she was the epitome of beauty, his muse.

One can only hope to find such a powerful source of inspiration.

The First Grief 1902

The Judgement 1905

Ariel vs. Little Mermaid Sculpture

Blog #2: Frank Gehry

Hotel Marqués de Riscal, Spain

Frank Gehry is one of those particular artists/architect where I'm actually quite familiar with his work but not the man behind it. He was particularly relevant to the above excercise in that he derives much of his structural shapes from...dun dun DUN...paper. Or at least his designs bear a remarkable resemblance of such materials. And like my sketches, that's all I see when I look at most of his buildings. So my mind was put a bit at ease in that department. I took one of my sketches, added a door, and voila: L'Hotel Du Papier.

Anyway, a bit about the guy. He was born Frank Owen Goldberg in Canada  (Changed his named during his first marriage). He gained initial recognition for his private residence in Santa Monica, CA. Since then, he's been labeled everything from "paper architect", a "starchitect" (oi), to the "most important architect of our age". His architectural style, falling into Deconstructivism, has been said to be similar to funk or transcending modernism.

Dog Bark Park, Idaho

   Basically he designs buildings in forms or shapes one wouldn't normally think to use. Some see this as innovative while others have criticized the lack of practical functionality in his work and the space and materials lost to his indulgent designs. I partially agree with this. In my hometown of Cottonwood, ID we are known for The Giant Beagle, a bed n' breakfast in the shape of...a large dog. While the idea is fun, it makes for an awkward placement of rooms and space.

 

L'Hotel Du Papier

So what do we learn from this man? To break through the confines of accepted norms and conformity and to search for inspiration in the most unlikely of places.

From the Simpsons "the Seven-Beer Snitch" episode

The Rasin Building, Czech Rep.

Beekman Tower, NYC  (under construction)

Experience Music Project, Seattle

Blog #1: Abstract ...Paper?

   To be perfectly honest I have my misgivings about Art 108. It seems to primarily pertain to the philosophies of modern art rather than the technique of conventional art. This may stem from the fact that I've never much cared for abstract art. It may be a matter of personal preference but then again it may be that I have a difficult time venturing into that realm of abstract. Our first Excercise in class was to use a piece of paper as inspiration for an abstract or "Nonrepresentational" piece. Told to manipulate the paper (i.e. folding it, rolling it up, crinkling it up) we were then suppose to sketch the whole piece or simply a section that's structure/shape intrigued us.
   It sounded easy enough but here's where I found confusion in the concept (and still do). Upon reflective examination, I realized that my first 3 sketches were in fact...just sketches of paper. At least for me it still was Representational...of paper. After another  2 or 3 sketches and I stopped referring to the piece of paper altogether and instead just created shapes I felt could potentially be created by paper. But no matter what I tried and 15 sketches later, I looked at my work and all I saw was ... paper.
    Proceeding with the assignment, I chose the one I preferred the most but then I examined why. It expresses the duality of opposites in a single subject. A contradiction, as it were, in one self. Needless to say I identify with this. But was this not just another Representation of myself or my psyche? This is when the thought entered my mind; Can ANY piece of artwork be truly Nonrepresentational in the eyes of the artist? Based on our inspiration, we know what is was/is, we know what is means to us and we know how it makes us feel. But what about the audience? Obviously they can't get into our heads so at this point many of those aforementioned aspects become subjective. Is this what makes art abstract? After context, medium, size, environment, etc are taken into account. How will it make them feel? What will it mean to them? Will they see paper?