Rik Shifty Art Design

This week we look at quick glimpse at some of my recent art pieces.  I enjoy creating clay sculptures and painting visions in my head or transposing a photograph to canvas, while modifying it to my liking.  I also have a passion for ink art whether in the form of abstraction, detailed drawings or fanciful designs.  The art influence that I see in the majority of my work would be somewhere between realism and impressionism.     I say realism because I enjoy nature and recreating it in some media, with the express intent to make it as real as I am capable of making it.  In respect to Impressionism, this comes from the use of bright colors and my interpretation of the light and what I see in the picture of my mind.   I tend to paint the shimmers of light or recreate what my camera eye caught; similar to Claude Monet where he captured the light in small spaces and creates a beautiful picture like “On the Bank of the Sienne, Bennecort”.   This is one of the paintings I am most proud of…I call it “Amante di Acqua”, Italian for “Lover of Water”.  It is approximately 60”x34” and framed with two pieces of drift wood I found and cured over a couple of winters.  This is probably my best work that still survives to this day. 

The second piece I will show you was never titled.  I had it finished and it did not survive delivery day.  This piece was a huge time investment and it was shattered on route to the art show.  

I put approximately 40 hours into the wing itself.  Made of porcelain, and very fragile, I carefully carved out the porcelain on both sides; extravagant feathers on one side and the other side photographed.  This photo is the only proof that it existed and I wish I had more.  This was the masterpiece to date for me and ……..I just teared up…….hold on……….ok…  Back to it.

Many works of art have been made by my hands, but very few will I share with anyone.  They all have a special place to me, and of course the fact that I am my most qualified critic, I want to make sure that whatever has my name attached to it be just what I intended it to be.   I usually look back on a piece and say that really is missing something.  I shelve it and maybe come back to it later (months).  I think I approach the definition of OCD sometimes and I get completely immersed in a project, and if it isn’t turning out, I immediately forget and throw all my other eggs in the new basket for awhile.  The work that Central has seen, has been completely uninspired; which is of no one’s doing, I have just had my primary focus other places, and operating within a deadline is difficult for me sometimes.  If I feel inspired I can whip something up in a day, but otherwise months might go by.  Can you really call it “art” if you are forced to come up with something?  It may look like art but it certainly won’t have much extrinsic meaning.   

My mother was quite the artist, so sometimes I wonder if there is a genetic piece that has transferred on.  Like other abilities passed to children, perhaps art aptitude is as well.

Inspired by Roy Lichtenstein

        In this installment, I wanted to bring one of my favorite artists to the limelight.  Artist Roy Lichtenstein (1923 – 1997).  His early work sprang from caricatures of artists and famous celebrities in motion or doing some task as well as abstractions of Western motifes.  The popular majority of his work is contrived from comic strips popular in the US since the 1950’s among youth.  He has a very certain style and that style is still wildly popular today.  He considered his art to be “Industrial Art”, and there appears to be many followers.  Many of his works seem simple in design, but offer the viewer a fun look at the contemporary world through the panes of comic strip boxes.  There is a stipple design called Ben-day dots that are seen in most of his paintings.  They play on the printing techniques used in newspapers and in many low resolution printings.  Throughout his collection, you will see women crying, embraced, or involved in some sort of dramatic situation, as well as parodies on advertising and the ideas of the day, which include some timely humor.  For example, he has a piece called “Portrait of a Duck” 1989, where we see a Disney figure of Donald Duck with dollar signs in the eyes and evoking from the head; by this, he seems to be making fun of the Disney Corporation and perhaps the greed associated with it.

       The focus piece today is “Kiss V” 1964 by Roy Lichtenstein.  The original piece is a drawing that was later turned into screen print and painted.  It has been duplicated and rendered in many different styles also.  This is an image of a man and woman embracing in a kiss.  It is a colorful piece and really stands out.  The man is wearing a blue shirt/sport coat, and the woman is all primped up in perfect 60’s form and a tear is being shed, as they embrace tightly and kiss.  “Kiss V” include the Ben-day dots and is compositionally very balanced, with focal points in the lips, eyes, and hair.  Critics say that this is a purely satirical look at the traditional roles of male and female in the 1960’s.  Maybe seen as a woman forcibly holding her man as if he were the only way for her to feel comfort, or that she is needing of comfort from a long day of grooming and making the house ready for the return of her man.  The tear she sheds for emotion as if all women are overly emotional, fragile and incapable of rational thought.  I think that people and critics really make too much of this piece of art.  I simply see a lonely woman who is happy enough to cry that she is after however long in time, finally in the embrace of her man and even throw in a kiss to make the moment even brighter.

Original Drawing

Replicated Piece

              I've found it is also interesting which way this work is laid out, woman above or man above.  By simply rotating the canvas you can maybe make different realizations of the intended meaning.   I really believe this to be a question of are you a pessimist or optimist?  If you are an optimist I think you see a happy situation, one that is bringing two people closer together, and if you are a pessimist, than you see this art as a travesty and intentional slight on humanity and society as a whole.  Some may say it requires more effort to be pessimistic, but I think it requires just as much thought to be positive.  And perhaps you can gain a smile.  

           That smile was most certainly attained as the original drawing in graphite and crayon, “Kiss V” was sold at Christie’s auction house New York in 2011, for $2,098,500.  I find it important to mention that the drawing was 6” x 6”, thus raising over $58,000 per square inch of paper.  That dollar figure doubled the estimates, and the previous owner received one of the heaviest grossing payouts for a drawing (per square inch) in history.    

http://www.artkuwait.org/2011/04/roy-lichtensteins-artwork-won-in-10.html

http://www.moma.org/collection/artist.php?artist_id=3542

https://www.moma.org/docs/press_archives/3994/releases/MOMA_1968_Jan-June_0011_11.pdf?2010

Week 6

This week, we are looking at the “Blue Nude” by Henri Matisse, 1907.  In this painting there is a strong presence of primitivism and a sense of avant-garde.   First reaction to this painting was of initial shock at the color choices, so bold and in your face.  Then, secondly the nude figure seems to be right in your face as well.  As if zooming in on the nude was necessary for reaction.  Analyzing this, I see that this nude in comparison to older works and the “common nude” are very bold and out there.  Being honest with myself, I am not sure whether this is a male or female.  Of course the breasts are large and in your face, but the masculinity of the arms and hair and the covering of lower region kind of leave me a little confused.  There is very little detailed attention spent on the body and I think this was intentional to raise this question.  The nude also has a very muscular physique which promotes the confusion.  Female nudes otherwise were portrayed as soft and voluptuous, not hard and chiseled.  Perhaps, it was painting unisex on purpose to push the boundaries with the critiques at the time.  At first, I didn’t find this painting to be very awe inspiring.  It seems so simple that any “primitive” child could create it.  But after looking further on this painting, there are many hidden ideas.      

            In regard to the primitivism that the painting holds, Matisse paints with broad strokes and very little details.  The nude being surrounded by a jungle of sorts shows that this has a jungle roots idea, that we came from the jungle and this is a return in some fashion our roots.  There is also the idea that in primitivism, females are generally depicted as primitive, working in the fields or being put in nature settings to show their status.  Matisse’s “Blue Nude” follows this critique and also exemplifies another.  The apparent connection to simplicity and disconnection to complexity.  My thoughts here directly correlate to the works by Gauguin.  The majority of what I have seen by Gauguin lacks any detail, seems to be nearly finger paintings, but the ideas and concepts within them are definitely present.  The “Blue Nude” is also very subjective.  I believe this work by Matisse exaggerates and distorts lines, colors, and forms to be more subjective.  It leaves the viewer to decide on his own what he sees.  I think that this was done to be thought provoking and a cause for uproar of emotion and discussions at the well (water cooler of the time).   This nude to me is not considered as an object at all, but rather as a statement of something.  I’m not too sure what that statement is, but it is definitely not the “in the box” style.   And as I recall, this is a definition of what it is to be avant-garde.  To me, the political statement isn’t too clear, but the pushing forward into new envelopes of societal and artistic acceptance is there.