You would never have guessed this illustration is actually a very accurate self-portrait
I like the preface at the begining of the Story of O — Jean Paulhan’s “Happiness in slavery”, if that counts.
Pierre Molinier, Balthus & Pierre Klossowski, Hans Bellmer.... William Crawford is sexy but I hate the context in which his work is being shown — the works are found and being pimped out at all sorts of vanilla commercial galleries. I hope he finds out and there is some kind of financial retribution.
I love it, it gives it a second life. It’s a different thing than viewing the work in real life but it’s nice both are possible. Why even consider denying one or the other?
If only people that have the luxury of seeing art in Real Life get to witness that aura I would call that aura elitist.
I don’t think so, people joke about it but that's really as far as it goes. I like to imagine people are smarter than that.
Bad sellable art is art made as product, art-products. For me intention is very important, if the work is made just to sell, to fill a demand, to please, to boost — even if there is a comment on production involved in the work, if there is a demand involved it can often still be suspect. I have a feeling it's easier for other artists to see when this is happening then for an outside audience...A fake drip, an arbitrary squigle, a trendy acoutremant; an easy pleaser is in the details. When i was young I made this kind of art a few times so know what it feels and looks like, you feel like you’re lying. I don’t do that anymore.
