ci kim - the (solo) artist
May 16th 2007 01:45
i went and saw ci kim's exhibition, 'sad tiger's self navigation' at the arario gallery last week. some of his pieces were really quite nice with the overall flow of the exhibition telling a very detailed story as i walked around the space. one of his pieces struck me as my favorite which i earmarked to read about after the gallery, and as i was sitting having a cigarette and a latte after the show, i read that a friend nearly ruined this piece after a night of drinking and art 'creation'. funny, my favorite piece wasn't even done (partially) by the artist i went to see.
this started me thinking about art in general. is it ever created for anyone other than the artist? this exhibition was written up as the artists 'self journey' to discover his own art style while telling a story about the children's alphabet book 'trauriger tiger toastet tomaten' by nadia budde. and i think back to standing in the gallery, interpreting the pieces as i was, giving it credit, appreciating the works for what they were, when i realised i had been suckered into one mans self indulgent art realm. he was showing me where he had started, his journey through, and finally where he had ended up during this self development stage. but is that the idea of art generally i wondered?
i believe art should be funny, should tell a strong narrative (albeit a loose one), should be able to be linked to a certain time, and should represent an area within respect to a global ideology. that is only my opinion and probably my favorite type of art. but that made me think is art always created as a self indulgence by the artist? is there any art that has been created by the artist that they didn't feel a connection to? could it be said that artists should always wear their hearts on their sleeves when they create something?
this exhibition left me pondering many questions after i had consumed it, which is something that is synonymous with good art. at first i felt not completely satisfied with seeing one man's journey through 'his' mid life crisis, but then was appreciative that he had stirred other questions and emotions within. i guess he had in essence done a trick on me after all.
this started me thinking about art in general. is it ever created for anyone other than the artist? this exhibition was written up as the artists 'self journey' to discover his own art style while telling a story about the children's alphabet book 'trauriger tiger toastet tomaten' by nadia budde. and i think back to standing in the gallery, interpreting the pieces as i was, giving it credit, appreciating the works for what they were, when i realised i had been suckered into one mans self indulgent art realm. he was showing me where he had started, his journey through, and finally where he had ended up during this self development stage. but is that the idea of art generally i wondered?
i believe art should be funny, should tell a strong narrative (albeit a loose one), should be able to be linked to a certain time, and should represent an area within respect to a global ideology. that is only my opinion and probably my favorite type of art. but that made me think is art always created as a self indulgence by the artist? is there any art that has been created by the artist that they didn't feel a connection to? could it be said that artists should always wear their hearts on their sleeves when they create something?
this exhibition left me pondering many questions after i had consumed it, which is something that is synonymous with good art. at first i felt not completely satisfied with seeing one man's journey through 'his' mid life crisis, but then was appreciative that he had stirred other questions and emotions within. i guess he had in essence done a trick on me after all.
| 64 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog






















Comment by postmoderncritic
Postmodern Critic
Relativity Watch
Padsoc
I think that art can go through many permutations of meaning, especially during different stages. For instance, creating something for yourself encourages you to think in a very different space than selling it to an art gallery and then having people inspect it and make comments must add different layers of meaning. You see your work as interpreted by other people, which changes how you feel about it personally to some extent.
Very interesting and intelligent post!
Comment by Jonathon
Anthroblogogy
thanks for your comments. i think that is the big one with any form of self expression. do you create differently when you know it is for someone else? did you write that comment intending it for me, or was it something that was truly from your creativeness? perhaps that was the catch with the entire exhibition, one man's self journey with the intention to sell it at the end. clearly given it its own overriding path. nice angle.
Comment by Anonymous
Thanks for the convo~
Comment by postmoderncritic
Postmodern Critic
Relativity Watch
Padsoc
Comment by Jonathon
Anthroblogogy
Comment by Tersch
So is appreciation.
Sure you could analyse it down and look at brush strokes and what this or that means but in the end, the only question that matters is..."Do I like it?"
The question you pose is very interesting though, and funny enough could be asked of bloggers as well.....think about it
Comment by Jonathon
Anthroblogogy
i think we sometimes get wrapped up in the meaning of things, and actually forget about the end result. as a producer of something, sometimes the journey is more interesting then the final result, but not always as the consumer as they might be searching simply for aesthetic.
and yes blogging is a form of art in a way so it falls under this umbrella too.
Comment by Tersch
Comment by Mrs M
Mum's Word
I'm not an artist per se but I am a creative type so I'll take a stab at answering your question about art ever being for anyone else other than the artist.
I think it depends on when in your career you are creating it.
Go with me on this one...I'm taking the parent's point of view. My 6 year old daughter LOVES to draw and paint and when she is in the thick of it you can see that she just transforms (her dad is pretty good at art). But because she is so young she really looks for praise from me and her dad. But I'm sure that when she realises that she's good at what she does my approval won't matter.
But I'd imagine one thing is constant...while she's in the thick of creative...it's all about her and for her.
Good post.
Love & stuff
Mrs M
Comment by Jonathon
Anthroblogogy
well i suppose it starts at an early age then, and that pretty much confirms that artists (generally speaking) are creating something that is self expressive. excellent point and a nice way of approaching this.