This is an art blog based in Europe, primarily Switzerland, but with much about the US and elsewhere. With the changes in blogging and social media, it is now a more public storage for articles connected to discussions occurring primarily on facebook and the like.
(Site in English und Deutsch)
19 September 2015
Deskilling / Entfähigung
Deskilling in art --- "Entfähigung" in der Kunst --- ist eine Illusion der Frechheit als bieder Ersatz für echte Kritik. It is an Illusion of"cheekiness" as a middlebrow substitute for real critique.
07 September 2015
Labelling Oneself
I'm a radical constitutionalist democratic pragmatic stoic Westian-prophetic pragmatist with late-Wittgensteinian New Historicist/Cultural Materialist rebelous anti-Aesthetic-Academicist and Zen Eckhartian Christian leanings. How's that!
29 June 2015
"Covers" paintings blog
I have a new additional project, a blog documenting my 450+ "Covers" artworks created from 2001 until 2015. These are paintings or drawings in oil, acrylic and ink on paper, canvas or board in various sizes, but usually small (about A4-A3). They recognizably utilize the structure of comic-book covers, or Show-Card lettering posters, with title, bold lettering, price, date, numbering, image and so on. They usually have been usually exhibited in groups, as installations and as "footnotes" to my large painting-installations. I will be trying to post one every couple days, thus the complete group will take me about 2 years.
Die "Covers"-Werke sind Gemälde in verschiedenen Formaten, welche die Sichtstruktur der Comic-Heft-Titelseiten und Show-Card Schriftmalerei verwenden.
http://brandlcovers.blogspot.ch/
.
24 June 2015
The Gene Colan Jam Comic 2003
Here is a pdf of the "jam" comic a group of Colan fans, artists and writers both professional and amateur, made for Gene and Adrienne Colan back in 2003. Each team did one to three pages using characters and concepts connected to the famed artist Gene Colan, leaving their section with a cliff hanger. And then emailed it off. The next team had to pick it up and run with it, doing the same. We also added extras lik fake house ads, a letters col and so on. It took almost 2 years. we then send the final version and all the original art to Gene and Adrienne, who were delighted I am happy to say and called each of us. It was a joy to be a part of.
Link for viewing, click here.
Link for viewing, click here.
24 May 2015
Mark Staff Brandl: Leaving Chicago
Paul Germanos on his blog "Chicago Artworld" did an interview with me, as he has with a group of Chicago-artists-who-left-Chicago. Here it is! Link
Mark Staff Brandl: I just turned 60! I am an artist of the venticento, was born, mid novecento, in 1955 in Peoria and went to high school in Pekin, Illinois. I visited Chicago a lot as a child and after my initial studies moved there in 1980. I immediately fell in love with the city; Chicago is my hometown in my heart till this day. I left in 1988. Since then I have lived with my Swiss wife Cornelia in several places around the world including Tortola in the Caribbean and have lived primarily in Switzerland.
More about me: I am an associate professor of art history at the Kunstschule Liechtenstein and Schule für Gestaltung in St.Gallen, Switzerland. My shows include galleries and museums in the US, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, Egypt, the Caribbean; specific cities include Paris, Moscow, Chicago, Los Angeles and New York.
As a critic, I've been a contributor to London’s The Art Book, Sharkforum on-line, a podcaster for Bad at Sports, a Theory Editor for Chicago's Proximity magazine and a Contributing Editor for New York’s Art in America. I am also the curator of The the Kunstgrill and the Collapsible Kunsthalle.
Works of mine have been acquired by the Museum of Modern Art in New York, Victoria and Albert Museum in London, The Whitney Museum in New York, the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago, the St. Gallen Art Museum, The Thurgau Museum of Fine Art, The E.T.H. Graphic Collection in Zurich, The Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles, the International Museum of Cartoon Art, the Art Museum Olten and others.
PG: For what did you hope when you came to Chicago? A degree? A job? What did you think that you'd find here? What was your first impression of the city?
MSB: I began to have many possibilities to exhibit my work around 1980, so I left graduate school and moved to Chicago. I went to Chicago for the artworld. I also quickly got a job building exhibitions, dioramas and the like at the Field Museum of Natural History. Among other things there I was deeply involved in or built with my co-worker friends are the Eskimo house and the Egyptian hall, especially the Mastaba.
At first the artworld was great, with N.A.M.E. Gallery, ARC/Raw Space, Artemisia, Randolph Street Gallery and on and on. Many Kunsthalle-like places to show experimental work. There was a real feeling of breakthrough in the air, the very beginnings of Postmodernism, with amazing artists like Raoul Deal, Wesley Kimler, Michael Paha, Tony Fitzpatrick, Gary Justis, Jeff Hoke and me getting lots of attention. That changed later and is one of the reasons I left.
PG: Did you attend a school here? Which school did you attend? How long were you in school here? Did you receive a degree here? When did you receive your degree?
MSB: I studied art, painting, art history, philosophy, literature and literary theory at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana (BFA), Illinois State University in Bloomington (MA), Columbia Pac. University in California (MA), and received my Ph.D. in Art History and Metaphor Theory magna cum laude from the University of Zurich in Switzerland. (Diss here.) So, no, I did not directly study in Chicago. But I learned so much from Chicago's music, the museums, the artists. Like Phil Berkman and Edith Altmann.
PG: How long were you in practice here? Did you enjoy success on your own terms? Can you recall some peak experience? If you felt frustrated, what frustrated you? Poor sales? Lack of publicity? High rent? Crime? Inefficient transportation? Public apathy? Bad weather? What was the total amount of time that you spent as a resident?
MSB: My career as an artist began in Chicago. I must be a Chicago artist in my soul, for as Tony Fitzpatrick's daughter Gabrielle mentioned when we got together in Florence, Italy recently, I still have a Chicago accent in English. I got lots of media attention for my art, sold well, won some awards, was listed as best installation of the year (or something like that) in The New Art Examiner once for a Raw Space piece. And so on. It was going upward, but as you know art careers have ups and downs. I found Chicago's music, literature and comic art world's wonderful. I believe Chicago is a wonderful place to live; my wife loved it too in the year she lived there, and misses it: those amazing neighborhoods, the food, the various ethnic groups. Art too. The Artists. But not it's artworld.
PG: How does Chicago know you? Does Chicago know you? Have you been misunderstood?
MSB: I suspect that my rather wild lifestyle was more notorious than my art at the end of my "welcome" in Chicago ( I have since settled a bit.) I think as an artist, especially pre Neo-Academicist-Conceptualist Chicago days, I was and am known as a somewhat too abrasive, rebellious intellectual. Someone who is insufficiently sophistically behaved. A highly critical conceptual painter, a mongrel addicted to art, personal freedom, philosophy, painting and several vernacular arts, including comics and sign-painting.
PG:
Was there an event which precipitated your departure? For which other
city did you leave? What was waiting for you in that other city?
MSB: I left at the end of the 80s, when it appeared that there was nothing more for me in Chicago's visual artworld. In one of my recurring, sporadic changes, I had abandoned my earlier Late Conceptual Art and began pursuing the painting-installation-vernacular-art mongrelization that I still engage in. (Although all my "directions" have dealt with the same core content and subject matter.)
As I decided to abandon the Windy City, a brand of art was beginning to be enforced --- an exceedingly trendy, art magazine-derivative Neo-Conceptualism (then still linked to Neo-Geo). The SAIC Kirshner-Klan as we called it then. That, together with all the other aspects of Chicago's recurring provincialism, and a dreadful, dissolving love relationship, made me think, "Why the hell, then, don't you just go directly to that worshiped Mecca --- i.e. NYC?" I could see that Chicago was once again strangling its own creativity and would fade, as it indeed did, from Second City to Third, as LA was up-and-coming --- believing in itself!
I started on my way, yet then met my future wife (in the kitchen of my studio, strangely enough, due to a Maxtavern connection). She is Swiss, and after an unexpected further year in Chicago, and a later year in Tortola in the Caribbean, we headed off to Europe. I have now lived in one place or another in Europe for 27 years. Whenever I live for extended periods in the US, I never seem to make it out of NYC.
PG: (a) Does Chicago look different to you since your arrival to it and/or departure from it? Do you have advice for someone about to begin what you've finished? (b) Do you expect to maintain a connection to Chicago and its art world? What's your incentive to stay connected? Have you left friends or family here?
MSB: (answering both questions) Said a bit too roughly, Chicago is a great place to be from. To be FROM. Leave it. But keep up contacts. There are great, creative people there like Lynne Warren, Paul Klein, Bad at Sports, and so on. But Chicago is too provincial. Chances are better elsewhere. Provinciality is best construed as a state of mind, rather than one of geography. Once upon a time, provinciality consisted of knowing nothing of the world-at-large, only looking at local art and culture. Now that has inverted. The new provinciality is a form of consensus globalism, where you are always looking elsewhere, copying New York or the Biennale or documenta and never really looking at the great art occurring around your own corner.
I stay connected because I know that outside of the boring consensus-correct art, there are always wonderful artists creating unique, original, personal work in our city. Think of Chicago's theatre scene, literary world, and rich music, especially Blues, history. The same is true for visual art. Or can be.
PG: By what means do you stay abreast of developments in the arts in Chicago? Print? Social media? Visits?
MSB: Internet! Visiting, etc. From Sharkforum to Bad at Sports to emailing and facebook.
PG: In the end, is place important? Is physical location a matter of consequence in 2015?
MSB: For your day-to-day life, yes. But not really for art. A curator of a Kunsthalle told me in discussion that I had forgotten that it is the duty of curators in provincial areas to educate the local artists through confrontation with influences from outside. This is completely idiotic. Such "instruction" is totally unnecessary in our globally networked society. Most of us who live and work outside the few urban centers for culture immediately know everything that occurs in them. Normally, I have seen what is happening in New York City directly there, and Zurich, and Berlin, and London, and Florence and Istanbul, and more. And then 8 to 10 years later I am "instructed" about it? This teaching consists mainly in telling us which curatorially correct and momentarily accepted tendencies we should kow-tow before — something of a "Top o' the Pops" for the artworld, or even more banal, "Art World Star Search." As the artist Alex Meszmer opined, behind this lies the attempt to achieve "a little piece of Documenta, or New York, finally in every province." This thought process is what destroyed the originality of much of Chicago's art scene.
PG: Was some important subject omitted from this query? Please introduce any additional material which you believe to be relevant.
MSB: Artists in Chicago: if you do not leave, you can do something even more important. Start and maintain your own artworld, artvillages. Be antisophistic; stop being apparatchiks in your own "dissing." Cooperate with other artists. Ignore the current gatekeepers; they too shall pass. We will not. Art is a huge, millennium-long discussion among artists. The others are listening in. We can welcome them, but stop letting them dominate.
In the whole artworld, but clearly so in Chicago, we are in an academicist, mannerist situation that both artists and curators should rethink. Encourage self-reliance and the acceptance of responsibility on the part of artists, primarily, but also the rest of the Chicago artworld.
- May 20, 2015 (C) Mark Staff Brandl
Learn more about Dr. Brandl and his work by visiting his website: http://www.markstaffbrandl.com/
This article has been presented in its entirety, unedited.
May 22, 2015
2015: Mark Staff Brandl on Leaving Chicago
Paul Germanos: Hold old are you? Where are you from? When did you come here? Is Chicago one of many stops on your journey?Mark Staff Brandl: I just turned 60! I am an artist of the venticento, was born, mid novecento, in 1955 in Peoria and went to high school in Pekin, Illinois. I visited Chicago a lot as a child and after my initial studies moved there in 1980. I immediately fell in love with the city; Chicago is my hometown in my heart till this day. I left in 1988. Since then I have lived with my Swiss wife Cornelia in several places around the world including Tortola in the Caribbean and have lived primarily in Switzerland.
More about me: I am an associate professor of art history at the Kunstschule Liechtenstein and Schule für Gestaltung in St.Gallen, Switzerland. My shows include galleries and museums in the US, Switzerland, Germany, Italy, Egypt, the Caribbean; specific cities include Paris, Moscow, Chicago, Los Angeles and New York.
As a critic, I've been a contributor to London’s The Art Book, Sharkforum on-line, a podcaster for Bad at Sports, a Theory Editor for Chicago's Proximity magazine and a Contributing Editor for New York’s Art in America. I am also the curator of The the Kunstgrill and the Collapsible Kunsthalle.
Works of mine have been acquired by the Museum of Modern Art in New York, Victoria and Albert Museum in London, The Whitney Museum in New York, the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago, the St. Gallen Art Museum, The Thurgau Museum of Fine Art, The E.T.H. Graphic Collection in Zurich, The Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles, the International Museum of Cartoon Art, the Art Museum Olten and others.
PG: For what did you hope when you came to Chicago? A degree? A job? What did you think that you'd find here? What was your first impression of the city?
MSB: I began to have many possibilities to exhibit my work around 1980, so I left graduate school and moved to Chicago. I went to Chicago for the artworld. I also quickly got a job building exhibitions, dioramas and the like at the Field Museum of Natural History. Among other things there I was deeply involved in or built with my co-worker friends are the Eskimo house and the Egyptian hall, especially the Mastaba.
At first the artworld was great, with N.A.M.E. Gallery, ARC/Raw Space, Artemisia, Randolph Street Gallery and on and on. Many Kunsthalle-like places to show experimental work. There was a real feeling of breakthrough in the air, the very beginnings of Postmodernism, with amazing artists like Raoul Deal, Wesley Kimler, Michael Paha, Tony Fitzpatrick, Gary Justis, Jeff Hoke and me getting lots of attention. That changed later and is one of the reasons I left.
PG: Did you attend a school here? Which school did you attend? How long were you in school here? Did you receive a degree here? When did you receive your degree?
MSB: I studied art, painting, art history, philosophy, literature and literary theory at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana (BFA), Illinois State University in Bloomington (MA), Columbia Pac. University in California (MA), and received my Ph.D. in Art History and Metaphor Theory magna cum laude from the University of Zurich in Switzerland. (Diss here.) So, no, I did not directly study in Chicago. But I learned so much from Chicago's music, the museums, the artists. Like Phil Berkman and Edith Altmann.
PG: How long were you in practice here? Did you enjoy success on your own terms? Can you recall some peak experience? If you felt frustrated, what frustrated you? Poor sales? Lack of publicity? High rent? Crime? Inefficient transportation? Public apathy? Bad weather? What was the total amount of time that you spent as a resident?
MSB: My career as an artist began in Chicago. I must be a Chicago artist in my soul, for as Tony Fitzpatrick's daughter Gabrielle mentioned when we got together in Florence, Italy recently, I still have a Chicago accent in English. I got lots of media attention for my art, sold well, won some awards, was listed as best installation of the year (or something like that) in The New Art Examiner once for a Raw Space piece. And so on. It was going upward, but as you know art careers have ups and downs. I found Chicago's music, literature and comic art world's wonderful. I believe Chicago is a wonderful place to live; my wife loved it too in the year she lived there, and misses it: those amazing neighborhoods, the food, the various ethnic groups. Art too. The Artists. But not it's artworld.
PG: How does Chicago know you? Does Chicago know you? Have you been misunderstood?
MSB: I suspect that my rather wild lifestyle was more notorious than my art at the end of my "welcome" in Chicago ( I have since settled a bit.) I think as an artist, especially pre Neo-Academicist-Conceptualist Chicago days, I was and am known as a somewhat too abrasive, rebellious intellectual. Someone who is insufficiently sophistically behaved. A highly critical conceptual painter, a mongrel addicted to art, personal freedom, philosophy, painting and several vernacular arts, including comics and sign-painting.
MSB: I left at the end of the 80s, when it appeared that there was nothing more for me in Chicago's visual artworld. In one of my recurring, sporadic changes, I had abandoned my earlier Late Conceptual Art and began pursuing the painting-installation-vernacular-art mongrelization that I still engage in. (Although all my "directions" have dealt with the same core content and subject matter.)
As I decided to abandon the Windy City, a brand of art was beginning to be enforced --- an exceedingly trendy, art magazine-derivative Neo-Conceptualism (then still linked to Neo-Geo). The SAIC Kirshner-Klan as we called it then. That, together with all the other aspects of Chicago's recurring provincialism, and a dreadful, dissolving love relationship, made me think, "Why the hell, then, don't you just go directly to that worshiped Mecca --- i.e. NYC?" I could see that Chicago was once again strangling its own creativity and would fade, as it indeed did, from Second City to Third, as LA was up-and-coming --- believing in itself!
I started on my way, yet then met my future wife (in the kitchen of my studio, strangely enough, due to a Maxtavern connection). She is Swiss, and after an unexpected further year in Chicago, and a later year in Tortola in the Caribbean, we headed off to Europe. I have now lived in one place or another in Europe for 27 years. Whenever I live for extended periods in the US, I never seem to make it out of NYC.
PG: (a) Does Chicago look different to you since your arrival to it and/or departure from it? Do you have advice for someone about to begin what you've finished? (b) Do you expect to maintain a connection to Chicago and its art world? What's your incentive to stay connected? Have you left friends or family here?
MSB: (answering both questions) Said a bit too roughly, Chicago is a great place to be from. To be FROM. Leave it. But keep up contacts. There are great, creative people there like Lynne Warren, Paul Klein, Bad at Sports, and so on. But Chicago is too provincial. Chances are better elsewhere. Provinciality is best construed as a state of mind, rather than one of geography. Once upon a time, provinciality consisted of knowing nothing of the world-at-large, only looking at local art and culture. Now that has inverted. The new provinciality is a form of consensus globalism, where you are always looking elsewhere, copying New York or the Biennale or documenta and never really looking at the great art occurring around your own corner.
I stay connected because I know that outside of the boring consensus-correct art, there are always wonderful artists creating unique, original, personal work in our city. Think of Chicago's theatre scene, literary world, and rich music, especially Blues, history. The same is true for visual art. Or can be.
PG: By what means do you stay abreast of developments in the arts in Chicago? Print? Social media? Visits?
MSB: Internet! Visiting, etc. From Sharkforum to Bad at Sports to emailing and facebook.
PG: In the end, is place important? Is physical location a matter of consequence in 2015?
MSB: For your day-to-day life, yes. But not really for art. A curator of a Kunsthalle told me in discussion that I had forgotten that it is the duty of curators in provincial areas to educate the local artists through confrontation with influences from outside. This is completely idiotic. Such "instruction" is totally unnecessary in our globally networked society. Most of us who live and work outside the few urban centers for culture immediately know everything that occurs in them. Normally, I have seen what is happening in New York City directly there, and Zurich, and Berlin, and London, and Florence and Istanbul, and more. And then 8 to 10 years later I am "instructed" about it? This teaching consists mainly in telling us which curatorially correct and momentarily accepted tendencies we should kow-tow before — something of a "Top o' the Pops" for the artworld, or even more banal, "Art World Star Search." As the artist Alex Meszmer opined, behind this lies the attempt to achieve "a little piece of Documenta, or New York, finally in every province." This thought process is what destroyed the originality of much of Chicago's art scene.
PG: Was some important subject omitted from this query? Please introduce any additional material which you believe to be relevant.
MSB: Artists in Chicago: if you do not leave, you can do something even more important. Start and maintain your own artworld, artvillages. Be antisophistic; stop being apparatchiks in your own "dissing." Cooperate with other artists. Ignore the current gatekeepers; they too shall pass. We will not. Art is a huge, millennium-long discussion among artists. The others are listening in. We can welcome them, but stop letting them dominate.
In the whole artworld, but clearly so in Chicago, we are in an academicist, mannerist situation that both artists and curators should rethink. Encourage self-reliance and the acceptance of responsibility on the part of artists, primarily, but also the rest of the Chicago artworld.
- May 20, 2015 (C) Mark Staff Brandl
Learn more about Dr. Brandl and his work by visiting his website: http://www.markstaffbrandl.com/
This article has been presented in its entirety, unedited.
10 May 2015
What Representation Represents
This is an article I wrote long ago, Spring 1988, for the publication Chicago / Art / Write, for editor L.J. Douglas, (founding editors William Conger, Richard Loving and Frank Piatek). I just rediscovered it and as it has never been online, and I found it still pertinent to my thoughts and to art now, I thought I would upload it.
A photo of me in front of one of my paintings from several painting-installations at that time, 1988.
WHAT REPRESENTATION REPRESENTS
What constitutes representation, or rather what constitutes representation in a work of art? Discussions of this usually begin with the tale of the ancient Greek painter able to create a work so convincing that birds would attempt to eat the depicted grapes, and include a discourse on the original Greek word mimesis, linking it to imitation. Because our terms for representation commonly stem from this, we can be led into certain areas of thought. But none of the available translations are fully accurate, so I shall bypass this rather than be bogged down by obtuse argument.
There are arts that embrace representation and those that do not. The intrinsically representational arts are literature (including poetry, prose, and drama), the visual arts (including painting, sculpture, photography, and film), and, of course, other arts close to or between these areas, such as performance, comics mixed media, and intermedia. That favorite metaphor for abstract painters, music, is an example of an art which resists representation. For obvious reasons I am not discussing this last category and, owing to personal predilection, I want to discuss only the visual half of the former.
The representational nature of visual art is one of its most important, fruitful, and intriguing elements — yet for very particular reasons. It is amusing that we always speak as if illusion were truly possible in art. An argument can be made that this deception never genuinely occurs. We never mistake art for reality. The disinterestedness of the aesthetic attitude, as philosophers say, disallows this. To aesthetically perceive anything is in fact not to be "fooled" by pretence. We neither bump our noses trying to walk into Richard Estes paintings, nor rush about attempting to save the victim of a Hitchcock movie from harm.
The viewer is not over-distanced, of course: I might get tears at a tragedy, and frequently an excellent painting sends chills of excitement up my spine. Response to a work of art is in fact multilayered and complex. Art demands a synchronous, contrary, almost oscillating attention. I view a work both entranced and consciously considering the skill of the image or artifice. As an example, trompe 1'oeil, "fool-the-eye" painting, is ironically the opposite of its supposed intent. Our whole attention is riveted by the accomplishment of the artifice, which gives us the thrill. It in no way deceives us. If trompe 1'oeil wished to trick us the only successful pieces would be counterfeit bills. There is always the danger that simple emotional escapism can preclude moral involvement and analysis of larger context; Bertolt Brecht shared this concern, as is evidenced in his attacks on theatrical illusion.
What makes an image a representation of something? How is it a "picture?" Just because the artist intended — or we presume that he/she did — a work to be a representation of something, is it? Because the artist looked at a tree while in the act of painting is that why the .piece then bears the image of a tree? If I notice that a picture reminds me visually of a human's face, is it a portrait? These points may be of interest in the process of the artist, but it is obviously untrue to ascribe to any essence, or interest, of representation itself. Furthermore, I am not talking about "figurative" art, genre, or simple naturalism. Representation must go beyond that; we must consider the inclusion of history, meaning, as well as our abilities and inabilities to recognize it.
There is a famous scientific anecdote of chimpanzees able to recognize photos of themselves, yet certain humans who had never previously seen photographs were unable to do so. Even so-called primitive or traditional societies have highly sophisticated systems of representation that filter their vision. The convoluted modern "naive" theory is that if an image somehow resembles a photograph of a certain object — discounting certain aspects of photographic vision (such as out-of-focus) — then it is a representation of that object. This points, through its obvious illogicality, elsewhere. The point is that representation is largely a matter of social convention. As symbol shades into "picture" and is culturally dependent, I can only see representation fully realized and most pregnant with meaning, as concretized belief. By this I mean ideology, although-I hesitate to use this-current buzzword, or more accurately Weltanschauung ("world-looking-at," "philosophy-of-life") and Weltbild ("world-picture"). Flippantly, I might say that representation represents itself. This is not circular like a formal tautology, such as "what you see is what you get." A picture of the world, or some .element of it, is a rich evocative arena. A picture is open to critical interpretation and bears the weight of previous and current assumptions concerning the uses (and misuses) of similar images. Because of this we only see through conceptual skrims. Our knowledge of an image is a knowledge of the conditions inherent in that image. For instance, representation from the past reveals to a greater or lesser extent the superstructure of the society that produced it, which is of course related to other elements such as but not limited to the economic base. It also reflects, whether intentionally or not, the mores and values of the people and society out of which it arose.
Jan Van Eyck's painting fully depicts both the religiosity of his time and -the rising antimedieval materialism that was to eclipse it. Oscar Schlemmer's work proffers his period's hope for a grander future, yet also portrays the dehumanization it wrought. It is credible to postulate that much of our understanding of visual art is through its ability to give direct expression to the sense of shared humanity. But the strongest works are those that sustain the most complex responses, like life. Therein lies the presence and vigor of representation: Works of art can be made for interpretation, cognizant of their status, associations, and cultural situation. Artists have the ability to wield considerable power through their manipulation of the multiplicity of references, technical aspects, emotions, and intellectual assertions of representation to delineate the truth of our experience.
A photo of me in front of one of my paintings from several painting-installations at that time, 1988.
WHAT REPRESENTATION REPRESENTS
What constitutes representation, or rather what constitutes representation in a work of art? Discussions of this usually begin with the tale of the ancient Greek painter able to create a work so convincing that birds would attempt to eat the depicted grapes, and include a discourse on the original Greek word mimesis, linking it to imitation. Because our terms for representation commonly stem from this, we can be led into certain areas of thought. But none of the available translations are fully accurate, so I shall bypass this rather than be bogged down by obtuse argument.
There are arts that embrace representation and those that do not. The intrinsically representational arts are literature (including poetry, prose, and drama), the visual arts (including painting, sculpture, photography, and film), and, of course, other arts close to or between these areas, such as performance, comics mixed media, and intermedia. That favorite metaphor for abstract painters, music, is an example of an art which resists representation. For obvious reasons I am not discussing this last category and, owing to personal predilection, I want to discuss only the visual half of the former.
The representational nature of visual art is one of its most important, fruitful, and intriguing elements — yet for very particular reasons. It is amusing that we always speak as if illusion were truly possible in art. An argument can be made that this deception never genuinely occurs. We never mistake art for reality. The disinterestedness of the aesthetic attitude, as philosophers say, disallows this. To aesthetically perceive anything is in fact not to be "fooled" by pretence. We neither bump our noses trying to walk into Richard Estes paintings, nor rush about attempting to save the victim of a Hitchcock movie from harm.
The viewer is not over-distanced, of course: I might get tears at a tragedy, and frequently an excellent painting sends chills of excitement up my spine. Response to a work of art is in fact multilayered and complex. Art demands a synchronous, contrary, almost oscillating attention. I view a work both entranced and consciously considering the skill of the image or artifice. As an example, trompe 1'oeil, "fool-the-eye" painting, is ironically the opposite of its supposed intent. Our whole attention is riveted by the accomplishment of the artifice, which gives us the thrill. It in no way deceives us. If trompe 1'oeil wished to trick us the only successful pieces would be counterfeit bills. There is always the danger that simple emotional escapism can preclude moral involvement and analysis of larger context; Bertolt Brecht shared this concern, as is evidenced in his attacks on theatrical illusion.
What makes an image a representation of something? How is it a "picture?" Just because the artist intended — or we presume that he/she did — a work to be a representation of something, is it? Because the artist looked at a tree while in the act of painting is that why the .piece then bears the image of a tree? If I notice that a picture reminds me visually of a human's face, is it a portrait? These points may be of interest in the process of the artist, but it is obviously untrue to ascribe to any essence, or interest, of representation itself. Furthermore, I am not talking about "figurative" art, genre, or simple naturalism. Representation must go beyond that; we must consider the inclusion of history, meaning, as well as our abilities and inabilities to recognize it.
There is a famous scientific anecdote of chimpanzees able to recognize photos of themselves, yet certain humans who had never previously seen photographs were unable to do so. Even so-called primitive or traditional societies have highly sophisticated systems of representation that filter their vision. The convoluted modern "naive" theory is that if an image somehow resembles a photograph of a certain object — discounting certain aspects of photographic vision (such as out-of-focus) — then it is a representation of that object. This points, through its obvious illogicality, elsewhere. The point is that representation is largely a matter of social convention. As symbol shades into "picture" and is culturally dependent, I can only see representation fully realized and most pregnant with meaning, as concretized belief. By this I mean ideology, although-I hesitate to use this-current buzzword, or more accurately Weltanschauung ("world-looking-at," "philosophy-of-life") and Weltbild ("world-picture"). Flippantly, I might say that representation represents itself. This is not circular like a formal tautology, such as "what you see is what you get." A picture of the world, or some .element of it, is a rich evocative arena. A picture is open to critical interpretation and bears the weight of previous and current assumptions concerning the uses (and misuses) of similar images. Because of this we only see through conceptual skrims. Our knowledge of an image is a knowledge of the conditions inherent in that image. For instance, representation from the past reveals to a greater or lesser extent the superstructure of the society that produced it, which is of course related to other elements such as but not limited to the economic base. It also reflects, whether intentionally or not, the mores and values of the people and society out of which it arose.
Jan Van Eyck's painting fully depicts both the religiosity of his time and -the rising antimedieval materialism that was to eclipse it. Oscar Schlemmer's work proffers his period's hope for a grander future, yet also portrays the dehumanization it wrought. It is credible to postulate that much of our understanding of visual art is through its ability to give direct expression to the sense of shared humanity. But the strongest works are those that sustain the most complex responses, like life. Therein lies the presence and vigor of representation: Works of art can be made for interpretation, cognizant of their status, associations, and cultural situation. Artists have the ability to wield considerable power through their manipulation of the multiplicity of references, technical aspects, emotions, and intellectual assertions of representation to delineate the truth of our experience.
MARK STAFF BRANDL,
artist and art historian, formerly of Chicago, The Field Museum of Natural
History; now living in Switzerland
07 May 2015
Alex Meszmer, Laudatio Brandl "The 'Hood in miim Chopf" 23 April 2015
Vernissagerede
von Alex Meszmer
Mark Staff
Brandl - The Hood in miim Chopf
Vadianbank, St Gallen
Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,
Genau an den Tag kann ich mich nicht mehr erinnern, an
dem Mark und ich Nachbarn wurden. Aber es war im Herbst 2001 und wir waren
beide Kunstlehrer am Institut auf dem Rosenberg. Wir teilten das Klassenzimmer
und bei jeder Begegnung redeten wir über Kunst, die Kunstwelt, die
Kunstgeschichte. Wir ärgerten gegenseitig unsere Schüler, indem wir ihnen über
ihre Werke jeweils das Gegenteil erzählten… wenn solche Gespräche stattfinden,
beginnt eine Nachbarschaft, das war der Anfang von unserer ‘Hood’.
The Hood – das hat auch etwas von Horde, der
Stammeshorde, dem Zusammenschluss einer Gruppe in frühgeschichtlicher Zeit, die
angeblich etwa 80 bis 120 Mitglieder umfasste und mir wurde schon desöfteren
die These zugetragen, dass die Horde als attavistischer Mechanismus bis heute
in uns weiterwirke. So sollen auch unsere Adressbücher im Schnitt etwa 80 bis
120 Kontakte enthalten, mit denen wir dauernd im direkten Austausch stehen und
so angeblich die menschlichen Kapazitäten für den direkten Kontakt bestimmt
werden.
The Hood – die Nachbarschaft – können wir uns nicht
wirklich aussuchen. Das sind nicht nur Freunde, obwohl aus Hoodies auch Freunde
werden können. Es ist die Schicksalsgemeinschaft, die uns umgibt. Das ist die
nächste Umgebung, die mit einer Tasse Zucker oder Salz, etwas Kaffee oder mal
einer Schaufel aushelfen kann. Sie kennen das, nehme ich einmal an. The Hood
ist das kleine Dorf, das uns umgibt, egal ob wir in einer Megacity oder auf dem
Lande wohnen – auch in Berlin, Zürich, New York, London gibt es The Hood. Es
ist der Radius in dem ich mich bewege. Das kann Kreuzberg sein, Kreis 4,
Chelsea oder das Eastend. Eigentlich leben wir immer in einem Dorf.
Die Umgebung – the area – ist der Ausgangspunkt für The
Hood in miim Chopf. Mark Staff Brandl begann die Menschen in seiner
unmittelbaren Umgebung zu porträtieren. Aber es sind nicht nur Porträts. In der
Manier der Renaissance und Barock Maler wählte er zu jedem Porträtierten einen
Gegenstand oder liess ihn auswählen, der charakteristisch für die Person oder
die Personen ist. So wird jedes Werk zum Diptichon und jedes Porträt erhält ein
Bild mit einem Attribut und erweitert das Abbild der Person mit einer
Geschichte.
Attribute kennzeichnen in der Malerei die
Dargestellten. Die griechisch-römischen Götter, die Protagonisten aus der
Bibel, die Heiligen – sie alle haben Attribute, durch die wir die Personen, die
Bilder und damit die auf dem Bild erzählten Geschichten entschlüsseln können:
eine Muschel auf dem Meer, Perlen und die Dame ist nackt – das muss die Geburt
der Venus/Aphrodite sein; oder ein halbnackter Mann, an einen Baum gefesselt
und von Pfeilen durchbohrt – das ist der heilige Sebastian während seines
Martyriums.
Attribute findet man auch in der profanen Porträtmalerei
und das Spannende dabei ist: die Namen und die individuellen Lebensumstände
eines oder einer Porträtierten aus der Renaissance wissen wir vielleicht nicht
mehr. Aus der Kleidung und den Attributen können wir jedoch Rückschlüsse ziehen
auf den Beruf, den Stand und die Eigenschaften, die vom Maler hervorgehoben
werden sollten:
der tugendhafte Kaufmann, die vornehme Dame usw.
Mit der Zeit ändern sich die Wirklichkeiten der Bilder.
Wie entschlüsseln wir aber die 44 Attribute dieser 44
Bilder?
Um Ihnen ein Beispiel zu geben, entschlüssele ich
Ihnen, was es mit unserem Porträt und unserem Attribut auf sich hat:
So wie Mark Staff Brandl in Trogen, in der
Nachbarschaft von St Gallen lebt, leben wir – mein Partner Reto Müller und ich
– in Pfyn. Das ist auch in der Nachbarschaft von St Gallen – aber für St Gallen
ist der Thurgau gern eher weniger Nachbarschaft, als tiefe Provinz.
Pfyn hat seinen Namen vom spätrömischen Grenzkastell
Ad Fines und Reto und ich leben in einem Haus, das auf den Mauern dieses
Kastells gebaut ist. Die römischen Mauern waren auch der Grund für ein
Kunstprojekt – der zeitgarten und das Transitorische Museum zu Pfyn – and dem
wir seit bald zehn Jahren arbeiten. Ad Fines übersetzt heisst an der Grenze,
aber vielleicht auch: am Ende der Welt. Ein römischer Soldat, der vor 1700
Jahren nach Pfyn versetzt wurde um dort Dienst zu leisten, fühlte sich
wahrscheinlich noch viel mehr in die Provinz verdammt, als ein St Galler, der
heute in den Thurgau zieht.
Der Gegensatz zwischen dem Zentrum und der Provinz und
die Gefühle, die diese verbinden, das hat uns interessiert, als wir vier Jahre
lang versucht haben, eine antike römische Säule von Rom nach Pfyn zu bringen
und es ist die römische Säule, die unser Attribut darstellt. Sie sehen unser
Attribut verweist auf einen Aspekt unserer Arbeit.
Gleichzeitig kreist das Thema um eine Diskussion, die
Mark und ich seit Jahren führen: Was ist Provinz? Was ist ein Zentrum? You
always live in a village, sagt Mark dazu. Die Kunstwelt, das Dorf in dem wir
Künstler imaginär leben, ist eben auch: ein Dorf. Die Kunstkritikerin Annelise
Zwez sagte dazu einmal: Wir in der Kunstwelt leben auf einer sehr kleinen
Insel. Vielleicht ist die Kunstwelt noch abgeschlossener als ein Dorf im
Appenzell.
Und vielleicht hat das damit zu tun, dass Kunst gerne
als elitär betrachtet wird, auch wenn sie dies längst nicht mehr ist. Elitäre
Kunst ist für den Adel gemacht, sagt Umberto Eco, nur der Adel hat auch die
Zeit und die Musse sich in Kunstwerke hineinzudenken und sich ganz in der
Auseinandersetzung eines bestimmten Aspekts zu vertiefen. Der Adel ist aber
auch eine aussterbende Spezies.
Mark Staff Brandl behandelt alle Personen und ihre
Attribute in seiner Bilderserie gleich – da könnte man ihn als einen
demokratischen Maler bezeichnen.
The Hood in unserer heutigen Welt betrifft natürlich
auch unsere virtuelle Umgebung: Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, tumblr.
Social Media hat The Hood erweitert und wir
diskutieren Ausstellungen, Philosophie und Kunst mit Menschen, die wir im
analogen Leben vielleicht nie getroffen hätten.
Interessanterweise ist dies keine neue Erfindung, denn
Grenzen überwindende Kommunikation in der Kulturwelt existiert seit der
Erfindung transportierbarer Botschaften.
Trogen mit den Zellwegern, ihren Kontakten und ihrer
ausscheifenden Korrespondenz im 18./19. Jahrhundert bietet dazu ein Beispiel.
Trogen – The Hood, Marks Nachbarschaft – da ist sie
wieder und diesmal im historischen Kontext.
Als ich Mark Staff Brandl vor bald 15 Jahren
kennenlernte, bezeichnete er sich als konzeptueller Maler. Er denkt in
kunstgeschichtlichen Dimensionen und seine künstlerische Nachbarschaft geht
weit über Trogen, die Ostschweiz und auch die Schweiz hinaus. Wären Zeitreisen
bereits erfunden, Mark würde sie nutzen um direkt in die Ateliers der Künstler
aller Zeiten zu reisen, um mit ihnen zu diskutieren. Er wäre mit Sicherheit dauernd
unterwegs. Er weiss, was er tut und bei allem, was er tut, kommt er immer
wieder auf die Malerei zurück. Malend experimentiert er mit dem Bezug zu
Geschichte und Kunstgeschichte, mit Kontext, mit Kultur, seiner sozialen
Umgebung, mit philosophischen und soziologischen Aspekten und er dokumentiert und
kommentiert was um ihn herum passiert.
Nehmen wir heute Abend als Beispiel. Wir befinden uns in
einer Bank. Hier geht es um Bares und Banknoten. Wenn der Künstler, seinen
Porträtierten anbietet, dass sie die Bilder gegen Aktivitäten, Dienstleistungen
oder andere Objekte tauschen können, ist das von vorneherein mitbedacht, auch
eine kleine Rebellion und steht im Kontext mit dem Ausstellungsraum an sich.
Was unser Attribut zu unserem Porträt bedeutet, habe
ich Ihnen enthüllt. Jetzt bietet sich aber für Sie, sehr geehrte Damen und
Herren, heute endlich einmal die Gelegenheit, den immer etwas peinlichen
Smalltalk an Kunstvernissagen zu umgehen. Sie können mit den anwesenden
Porträtierten ganz locker ins Gespräch kommen, indem sie über die Geschichten der
Attribute reden. So können wir heute Abend von einem Kunstpublikum einer Ausstellung
ganz einfach zu Nachbarn werden. Dann sind wir The Hood. Brandls Hood! nicht
nur in seinem Kopf.
22 April 2015
Brandl Exhibition "The 'Hood in miim Chopf"
"The 'Hood in miim Chopf”
Mark Staff Brandl
Text for the show in English:
"The 'Hood in miim Chopf
Mark Staff Brandl
Mark Staff Brandl
My exhibition is titled "The 'Hood in miim Chopf." This is a
combination of American English slang and Swissgerman dialect. In full
English "The Neighborhood in My Head" and in Hochdeutsch, "Die
Nachbarschaft in meinem Kopf." I show largely outside my living area
nowadays. In the gallery that represents me in Zurich, Jedlitschka
Gallery, or in Italy, New York, Chicago, elsewhere in Europe and so on.
When I was asked to exhibit in the exhibition space of the Vadian bank, I
had to think of something appropriate to being there. That is one of my
joys as an artist, to work in what I call "Contextually Specific" ways.
My work generally merges painting with installation, sign-painting and
sequential art, often with a central conceptual framework that comes
from the context of where it is being shown.
I decided that since
the location was somewhat local, I would make it a celebration of the
VERY local. I decided to do portraits of people who live near me in the
village of Trogen, AR, people with whom I have regular contact. Thus
neighbors. That is my "Viertel", or as we say it in the US, my " 'Hood."
However, then I thought to expand it a bit, to bring it into our mobile
present. I added to the group people who I see regularly, who I feel to
be my neighbors, but who do not live directly near me. Thus, the
neighborhood in my head, in my thoughts. These are people in Trogen, St.
Gallen, the local artworld, Liechtenstein and more. Ones I talk to and
think about.
Each portrait consists of two panels. The first is an
image of their face in my style, in a variation I call
"drawing-paintings" as they are somewhere between those two media. The
second panel is of a thing they chose, or I chose for them, that
represents them in some way. Die verschmelzen Einflüsse von Jackson
Pollock, R.B. Kitaj, Jacopo Tintoretto, Schrift-Malereimeiner Vater Earl
Brandl, und dem Comic/Sequenzielle-Kunst-Zeichner Gene Colan. Sie
scheinen mit geschleuderten Tropfen von Schildmaler-Email-Farbe
gestaltet zu sein. Aber die Striche und Linien verwandeln sich zu
Repräsentationen ihrer selbst. I do visual philosophy in slang. In the
Renaissance and Baroque arists would often paint objects that were
synecdoches from the interests of the sitter. I always loved that, this
is my version. In the Vernissage, you can ask the individuals what the
objects are and why.
One more conceptual aspect. The paintings are
for sale in pairs, as together they make up the portrait. However, the
individual subject, those people who I represented have also the option
of proposing a barter with me. A Gegengeschäft or Tauschhandel.
Especially since most are not collectors: What they could do or the like
for me in exchange for their portrait.
Welcome to an aspect of my
world in the Ostschweiz. Thank you to Walter Ernst and the Vadian Bank,
and all the people in the pictures for this possibility and allowing
this strange trade.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Der Text zur Ausstellung in Deutsch:
"The 'Hood in miim Chopf
Mark Staff Brandl
Mark Staff Brandl
Der Ausstellungstitel "The 'Hood in miim
Chopf" ist eine Kombination aus amerikanisch-englischem Slang und
Schweizerdeutsch. In korrektem Englisch hiesse der Titel "The Neighborhood
in My Head" oder in Schriftdeutsch: "Die Nachbarschaft in meinem
Kopf".
Ich stelle meine Kunst heutzutage hauptsächlich
ausserhalb meines Wohnorts aus. In der Galerie Jedlitschka in Zürich, in
Italien, New York, Chicago, anderswo in Europa und auf der Welt. Aber selten
Zuhause. Als Herr Ernst mich angefragt hat im Gewölbe-Ausstellungsraum
in der Vadian Bank auszustellen, wollte ich mir etwas Spezielles, etwas
Geeignetes dafür ausdenken. Das ist für
mich die grösste Freude als Künstler, "Contextually Specific",
Kontext-Spezifisch, zu arbeiten. In meiner Kunst verschmelzen vorwiegend
Malerei mit Installationen, Schriftmalerei und Sequenzieller Kunst (Comics) in
einem zentral-konzeptionellen Rahmen,
welcher wiederum in einem Zusammenhang mit dem Ort steht, wo sie präsentiert
wird.
Ich beschloss, da der
Standort lokal ist, eine Serie zu malen, die das Lokale zelebriert und
verkörpert. Ich porträtierte Personen, die in meiner Nähe im Dorf Trogen AR
wohnen und mit denen ich regelmässigen Kontakt habe – also meine Nachbarn. Das
ist mein Viertel oder wie wir in den USA sagen: mein " 'Hood". Dann
überlegte ich mir, wieso ich den Kontext nicht ein bisschen erweitern sollte um
die Serie in unsere mobile Gegenwart zu holen. Ich fügte Personen zur Gruppe
hinzu, die ich als Nachbarn betrachte, obwohl sie nicht direkt nebenan wohnen.
Es sind die Menschen, die die Nachbarschaft in meinem Kopf, in
meinem Gedanken bilden. Diese Leute kommen aus Trogen, aus St.Gallen, aus der
lokalen Kunstwelt, aus der Schule, aus Liechtenstein und so weiter – Leute, mit
denen ich regelmässig kontakt habe und über meine Gedanken und Überlegungen
diskutiere.
Jedes Porträt besteht aus zwei Tafeln. Die erste
Leinwand ist eine Darstellung des Gesichts „des Nachbarn / der Nachbarin“ in
einer Variation meines Stils, den ich "drawing-painting"/
Zeichnung/Gemälde nenne, denn diese Arbeiten stehen irgendwo zwischen diesen
beiden Medien. Die zweite Leinwand ist ein Bild von einem oder mehreren
Objekten, das/die Person repräsentiert und die von der Person oder von mir
ausgewählt ist/sind. In den Bildern kommen Einflüsse von Jackson Pollock, R.B.
Kitaj, Jacopo Tintoretto, Schrift-Malerei meines Vaters Earl Brandl und die
Comics des Sequenzielle-Kunst-Zeichners Gene Colan zusammen. Die Bilder scheinen mit
geschleuderten Tropfen von Schildmaler-Email-Farbe gestaltet zu sein. Aber die
Striche und Linien verwandeln sich zu Repräsentationen ihrer selbst. Ich mache
visuelle Philosophie in Slang, auf Dialekt. In der Renaissance und im Barock
haben Künstler oft symbolische, synekdochische Gegenstände in Gemälde
integriert um die Interessen der Porträtierten darzustellen. Ich habe diese
Bilder immer geliebt und hier sind meine Versionen. In der Vernissage können
Sie die Individuen nach den Gegenständen und ihren Bedeutungen befragen.
Noch ein letzter konzeptueller Aspekt: es gibt der
Preis pro Tafelpaar als Diptichon, weil die beiden Bilder jeweils als ein
Kunstwerk zusammengehören. Allerdings gebe ich den individuellen Personen die
porträtiert sind, auch die Option mir
ein Gegengeschäft oder einen Tauschhandel vorzuschlagen. Ich mache das,
weil die meisten Porträtierten keine Sammler oder Angehörige der Kunstwelt sind
und ich bin gespannt, was sie für mich machen werden oder mir geben können im
Austausch für ihr Bild. So entsteht ein eigener Wertraum – was wiederum
spannend ist in einer Bank.
Ich heisse Sie herzlich willkommen zu meiner
Nachbarschaft im Kopf, einer Facette meiner Welt hier in der Ostschweiz.
Herzlichen Dank möchte ich Walter Ernst, der Vadian Bank und allen hier
dargestellten Personen aussprechen. Danke, dass Sie diese Ausstellung möglich
machen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)