Artist's Statement
I have to admit that I have always been a little uncomfortable
with the typical artist's statement. Among other issues, the attempt to boil
all of the various thoughts, perspectives and idiosyncracies that influence
my creative process into a few succinct sentences has always seemed more than
a little dishonest. More often than not, this approach results in stilted and
"academic" sounding text that is, in no way, as expressive as the
art itself. Words - at least my own words - tend to fall short. But in that
context, dialogue - talking to others about my work - seems to be more effective
than the standard monologue. For that reason, I have decided instead to post
my answers to a series of questions I was once asked by a curious and particularly
perceptive art student. Click on the questions to link to the answers.
Questions:
1. What is it that fascinates you or drives you to work with box
structures?
2. I have been really interested in Joseph Cornells work. I think
his piece, 'Untitled (Penny Arcade Portrait of Lauren Bacall)' is fantastic.
How far has Cornell influenced you and is your "Penny Arcade Portrait of
Joseph Cornell" (2000) a homage to the artist?
3. Which other artists have you been inspired by and where do your
influences come from?
4. Which materials do you most like working with and do you ever
include your own drawings or other mediums in your box assemblages?
5. What scale do prefer to work in and how does this affect the
work itself?
6. Do you use personal events/memories/experiences when you are
putting your boxes together?
7. Are you interested in making political or social statements
within your boxes? Do they reflect diffrent times/events or do your boxes work
together?
8. Do you find that containment (through your boxes) is the most
effective way of expressing yourself?
9. How important is it to you to provoke a strong reaction/ emotion
in your viewers?
10. Do you feel that your boxes
are like time capsules - and that in hundreds of years time they will be moments
in time that people will discover?
Answers:
1.) What is it that fascinates you or drives you to work with box
structures?
I like the three dimensional and the theatrical quality of
the boxes. Plus, the sense of containment/completeness, coupled with a certain
unavailability of the contents is also interesting. The boxes also have a sort
of 'museum display' quality, which I find delightfully antiquated, charming,
and comforting. There is sort of an implied knowingness/certainty that I enjoy,
but also disbelieve in. These fixed aspects of boxes help me to play off various
contradictory/simultanious meanings in the artwork. Also, the box structure
allows more interaction with the viewer, and expands the possibilities in which
the piece can be actually viewed.
Back to top
2.) I have been really interested in Joseph Cornells work. I think
his piece, 'Untitled (Penny Arcade Portrait of Lauren Bacall)' is fantastic.
How far has Cornell influenced you and is your "Penny Arcade Portrait of
Joseph Cornell" (2000) a homage to the artist?
Certainly! Cornell was my first inspiration for what I was
to do as an artist. Not too much is known about his working methods, but the
information about how he organized his materials and such has been invaluable,
- let alone the art itself. I've used many of his pieces as structural templates
for some of my own work. I feel the concepts are quite different, however. His
boxes are quite personal, and internal, while I feel mine are not typically
autobiographical, unless they are able to address some general human condition.
Penny Arcade Portrait of Joseph Cornell is as close a duplicate to the original
piece as I could make it, with the various elements of Cornell's life substituted
for Bacall's - which was actually quite clear-cut. I included his brother, Robert,
and his house in Flushing. Oddly, I have never seen the Cornell piece in person.
Perhaps someday....
Back to top
3.) Which other artists have you been inspired by and where do your
influences come from?
Other visual artists that influence the box-work are Duchamp,
Ernst, Schwitters, Rauchenburgh. I'm sure there are a number of others...basically
anyone who has ever built a construction interests me. Not sure how I feel about
installation art, w.r.t. my work. It lacks the boundaries that I enjoy, but
it does have a good theatrical and interactive quality. Concepts for the work
comes from everyday life: things that I see, current events, pop culture.
Back to top
4.) Which materials do you most like working with and do you ever
include your own drawings or other mediums in your box assemblages?
I like 'traditional' materials: wood, glass, metal. I loath
plastic, which I associate with poor quality and extreme waste. I like materials
that are durable but will also 'age', like brass. I generally do not include
any of my own drawings, etc. I like the idea of making the boxes out of something
already existent, which may already have it's own use and meanings. I think
there are enough 'things' already, so I only want to create more by using the
objects that already exist. I also think that some of my own drawings or such
would create an imbalance in the piece: the 'art' inside would stand out too
strongly. I would consider using my own photographs at some point, but it just
doesn't seem necessary ( yet)...
Back to top
5.) What scale do prefer to work in and how does this affect the
work itself?
I like to work small, most of the time. I've made a number
of works that are less than 3" overall. I think a good size for a box is, maybe
18" x 10" x 4". Something that you have to get up close to and can hold in your
hand and feel that it's only there for you. Unfortunately, this often creates
gallery display issues. Also, the pieces don't 'read' well from a distance,
and seem too dark inside. My largest piece was nearly 48" x 36", and everything
scaled up really nicely. It just gets cumbersome to work on really large pieces,
in that it's hard to see what they will look like unless I step back. Plus,
it's actually difficult to reach into the box to do the construction and attachment
work. Then there are storage and transport issues... Not that any of those things
would stop me, but I also have a certain disdain for really large work that
seems to be large for the sake of it. Quantity not quality.... Large pieces
also suggest something ego oriented, and sort of imply an amount of success
in that the artist is able to possess such a large studio in which to make the
work! Maybe an average viewer doesn't think this stuff...
Back to top
6.) Do you use personal events/memories/experiences when you are putting your boxes together?
Personal stuff is fine, but I need it to be something that
I think other people can relate to, or that can be used to fuel the 'discussion'
in the work. I like concepts that address 'truth' or 'love' or whatever, in
some sort of relatable way. Also, I like elements that are humorous. People
pay more attention if something is funny. Plus, it's fun. I think a lot of art
is too serious, or at the least, is devoid of any humor.
Back to top
7.) Are you interested in making political or social statements
within your boxes? Do they reflect diffrent times/events or do your boxes work
together?
For some reason, I tend to avoid politics as subject matter.
(I have done a few pieces, though.) I suppose there are already enough different,
contradictory voices for that! I figure that I often address (apparently) unquestioned
social attitudes, or address various hypocrisies. I guess that is about as standard
a role for a Modern artist as anything. In the long run, I guess I just want
the work to make the viewer think...something, ANYTHING! Or laugh...I think
that has a lot of value. I guess maybe you can't laugh if you aren't thinking,
anyway...I'm not sure, though....
Back to top
8.) Do you find that containment (through your boxes) is the most effective way of expressing yourself?
Yes. Probably the thing I like most about visual art is that
it is possible to have a variety of meanings at the same time, some of them
even contradictory. I think the 'containment' of the boxes is a pleasing juxtaposition
to this. Also, it's a bit ironic that the box concepts are often large, open-ended
issues and ideas, all nicely > locked-up!
Back to top
9.) How important is it to you to provoke a strong reaction/ emotion in your viewers?
I think that's pretty important...fortunately, it seems to
happen fairly often. Most people at least just really like the boxes, no matter
what the idea is behind it. An amazing amount of people get the humorous elements
as well. I think a strong reaction, no matter what, is really vital, at least
so that the viewer takes the time to interact with the piece. I don't know how
the art would work, otherwise.
Back to top
10.) Do you feel that your boxes
are like time capsules - and that in hundreds of years time they will be moments
in time that people will discover?
That's an interesting question. I do like the idea that
the work is durable enough to last that long...that is very appealing. Of course,
that's just 'craftsman's vanity'. I have no idea what people might think of
them that far ahead. A lot of the pieces have items which are already somewhat
antiquated, so they have that meaning now already. But I don't know how the
pieces would read if someone who is viewing it is thinking ' boy, what an old
light bulb'... Hopefully the concepts of the pieces will stay relevant. But
I can't imagine how the changing attitudes/meanings of the representational
objects will effect things.... Time will tell.
Back to top
