 |
| the past has its place |
1. Can you tell me a
little about your work in general?
My work doesn’t really
have a central theme really, but I do try to construct a visual frame that
links all the paintings and all the drawings. Each painting is an opportunity to explore different subject
matter, often times I make paintings that are about the creative process and
how that intersects with my personal and professional life. Generally my paintings take on a
multitude of meanings and I don’t feel comfortable pontificating to the viewer
what each piece should mean. I
like people to interact with my paintings, investigate them, and whatever
interpretation they create is okay by me.
It isn’t really up to me how it will or won’t affect people. I also take special care to assign
titles to the work that will engage a viewer’s imagination instead of spell out
the meaning for them. A pet peeve
of mine is when artists explain away all of the aura and magic of there work
of art. As a viewer I like having
a little bit of mystery.
2. Your paintings are so
complicated and realistic, how do you plan out all of these components before
paint actually meets canvas?
 |
| the morning never knows what the afternoon holds dear |
The truth is that I
don’t plan out all of the components of the painting before I begin. I do begin with a fairly exact drawing,
and a good understanding of what the end product will be, however that almost
always changes as I get into the painting. I am constantly adding and subtracting things as I go along,
trying to find the right combination of substance and style. I work from photographs, but try to
reference them as little as possible, so that I don’t feel like I am trying to
recreate a photo on a canvas. I
want to create an entirely unique image that takes advantage of the physical
properties of paint.
I am interested
in creating contrasting dimensionality, by making large flat color fields next
to highly formed objects or figures.
So I treat the picture plane like an abstract surface and pay special
attention to foundational formal principles, such as color relationships, value
distribution, balance, composition etc.
In the course of creating a painting I may have a plan for how it will
look, but once I start adding paint to the surface the reality strays from my
intentions, which is good, and I react by inserting whatever feels right for
the concept of the painting and what fits in a formal framework.
3. Do you set up a scene
and then photograph it or do you work from photographs you find?
 |
| one among the many |
I create a scene and
then photograph it, (with one exception, my drawing One Among the Many was a photograph of one of my former students
that I found). I will begin a work
one of several ways, sometimes I start with a title and build the rest from
there, sometimes I want to try something challenging like make a Pink painting,
or sometimes I have an idea of a subject or object that I want to use. Sometimes I know exactly the image I
want when I go to photograph, and sometimes I have a general idea and just keep
trying new things until I find it.
I use the different components in the scene to inform the narrative of
the painting, so I do put a lot of thought into what goes into each image.
I really like
experimenting with the gaze of my subjects and how they interact with the
viewer. In film when a character
looks into the camera or addresses the audience it’s called breaking the fourth
wall, in painting you see this happen all the time through art history,
famously in Olympia by Manet. I think that I use it as a way of
talking about the artifice of the surface, that I’m making something that is
naturalistic but doesn’t pretend to be something other than a painting. When the figure breaks the fourth wall
in a film they are telling the audience that they understand that the film
happening around them is not reality but they have a special insight into the
land of make believe that the audience is peering into. I think I’m trying to get the same
affect with my figures. I also
think that it is easier for people to connect with a figure if they are making
eye contact, so it’s way of getting the viewer’s attention.
5. Why do you place
yourself in your artwork?
I am not in my artwork
as often as people seem to think, I have a few paintings of my two best friends
who look just like me and I will do a self portrait from time to time. But I do admit, I paint myself enough
that it’s noticeable. And the only
reason for that I suppose is that all of my work is largely about me and my
understanding of the world. A lot
of my work is about the creative process which I can really only understand
through the lens of my experience, so why not just go ahead and use my visage
as the protagonist of the painting.
 |
| the hunger artist |
6. Does the paint color
deviate much from the true color of a scene? If so, how do you choose your
color alterations?
Yes, quite a bit. Since I don’t really look at the
photograph very often the colors get changed and exaggerated. I have made paintings that are more in
the photorealistic genre, but I didn’t feel as free as I do when I simply use
my intuition and understanding of painting to create entirely unique paintings.
7. I heard you taught at
Normandale this past year, what classes did you teach?
 |
| how far then, shall we say, that the east is from the west? |
I taught Painting 1,
Painting 2, Drawing 1 and Watercolor Painting. I loved teaching at Normandale, it was a great
experience. I had some really
wonderful students and got to see some of them mature artistically. I was a sabbatical replacement and wish
I could have stayed on longer.
8. Has teaching
influenced your own artistic practice?
Yes, since teaching is
an exercise in deconstruction of one’s practice, you really begin to understand
your weaknesses. This has
encouraged me to really develop my weaknesses instead of avoiding them as my
natural tendency would dictate.
9. I saw that you
received degrees in Arizona, Louisiana, and Kentucky; is the art scene
different in Minneapolis?
 |
| that which we've built together throughout these many years |
I think that every large
city has a different art culture, certain things are valued more, and certain
types of work are more successful etc.
For instance, Phoenix, Long Beach and San Diego each have a certain
style, or a prominent theme for the work that thrives in those areas. There are some successful figurative
artists in Phoenix, but the work that is the most successful deals with
national identity/border issues or water issues. I think that the Minneapolis
Art scene is similar in a lot of ways to that of Cincinnati (where I grew up) in
that there isn’t really a predominant media, style or subject matter. There also isn’t a lot of
For-Profit galleries or “Blue Chip” galleries but there is a great appreciation for creativity through
things like the Art-A-Whirl.
However I get the sense that the country’s biggest Artwalk is more about
having something interesting to do than having an opportunity to look at great
art. And for that matter it
shouldn’t be, that’s a sort of terrible context to see art, I know because I
went through a similar art walk 4-6 times a year at my studio in
Cincinnati. I do think that it’s
amazing the way that Minnesota supports the arts, there are a lot of funding opportunities for artists and a
few really nice Non-Profit Galleries like Soo VAC. I also see little hints of the New Orleans Art Scene in this
city, because of peoples interest in beauty and oddity and their appreciation
for diverse cultural expression.
For more information on Critique of Pure Reason, Benjamin Roger's show opening August 2nd, CLICK HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment