crit coming up

i spent yesterday printing out some stills and making some drawings in the studio. also toning some canvases (those tiny cheap postcard sized) bright green. i sold a painting yesterday (thank you, ms. liu!,see sold work below), starting the day off right.

yesterday's studio

maybe i am mediocre. maybe i am supposed to be average? how frightening.

To look:
at everything which overflows the outline, the countour, the category, the name of what it is.

All appearances are continually changing one another: visually everything is interdependent. Looking is submitting the sense of sight to the experience of that interdependence. to look for something (a pin that has dropped) is the opposite of this looking. (Berger, The Sense of Sight p.19)

the money of it all

today i am feeling particularly cramped by the burden of money. i should not in grad school- student loans should be fine. and i know by most standards i have plenty. but i feel an obligation (to the loan, to felix and our life together) to always watch it- and i feel my work might be paying the price (pun intended?) for it.

ugh. what a gal without a trust fund to do?

back, baby number four (semester two)

my secoudn semster i drilled deep into richter and tuymans. i made work in which every thought was anticipated and labored. i felt underserved in terms of contemporary dialogue and stilted- perhaps by writing so much about my studio process. alas- i thyink i needed to go there. so i went. now i can leave (in semester three).

back, baby number three (residency two)

august 2004 after my first semester with craig stockwell. i had around 14 square paintings and had more fun at this residency (talking, thinking, etc). i committed not to "fake it" if i did not know a word or idea some one was talking about (i'm sure much to the chagrin of people who had to tell me). my notebook from this residency has scrawled words on the front- ones i'd then look up after i got home. and i did. there was an urgency for me at this residency- i needed to mine all the information i could out of it because it would soon be over. near fatal match for my intensity. i made little vellum books.

back, baby number two

..back in time. back to the frist semester. AT was Craig Stockwell. Did some basic readings on language and painting. RIchter, Greenberg and Steinberg. Bois and Elkins. stuck to one size the whole semester with good results. janet was my faculty advisor. i read and made work with rigor. made lots of improvements in focus.

back, baby number one (residency one)

...back in time. i'm going to treat a few blog entries as a back-track. not really rue to blogging fashion but a ghood way to catalog my thought for my graduate work. so let's begin. way on back to over a year ago at the first snowy vermont residency (super cold). i'll get out my trusty notebook and let thoughts fly.

i brought green rivers/aerial work. all cramped in the little space. i had fifteen critiques that week. (i was all business). i listened to my recording of my crits right after each one- transcribing them all and recorded them by making pink tabs in my sketchbook where crit notes were.





allan de souza:my first cit (i think) and allan was a guest critter. everyone else did the talking. do i need to hold on to the river reference? "why re-do the problem of landscape vs. abstraction?"

mike glier: formal issues. be confident.

moyra davey (one-on-one): peter handke. uneasyness. mary heilman. do more photos and maybe show them with paintings.

lynn i.: danoka (featherboard)

martin:?

tsao:?

wangechi mutu: try dripping. get rid of the precious little frames (i did). too pre-meditated and heady. "i don't want to see what you think."

janet kaplan: anxious. when a thing comes toward you it's about paranois.

sowon kwon: lee bontique. traditional wester pictorial representation. why bring the photo back to painting?

marie shurkus: creat new problems. visions of america book. stones, bb king, robert johnson, blind willie. i dont' remember if this is what we talked about- but i wrote in on the marie page.

g baker (guest lecturer): richter. and purple is problematic.

sharon hayes: think about parallell relationship of work and titles. and audience.

michael willis: huh.

todd bartel: why paint? why square? why landscape?

k. brooke: narrative titles

david deitcher: the color is just not happening.