Intuitivism

The world is a pearl on which one’s reflection can be found

The mirroring of truth trumps the manipulation of truth

Power resides within the individual

************************

Intuition is the 6th sense
it can be utilized and cultivated through art

…of Intuitivism…

PREDOMINANCES

vision over concept
work over word
subtlety over shock
quality over quantity
conviction over apathy
evolution over dogma
freedom over necessity
guidance over structure
uncertainty over certainty
experience over explanation
individualism over conformity
eternal over contemporary
intuition over institution

MERGERS

meaning with form
feeling with thought
execution with concept
expression with deliberation
imagination with discernment
substance with image

INEQUALITIES

technology ≠ advancement
randomness ≠ creativity
immaterial ≠ spiritual
referential ≠ actual

concept art
intention art

EQUALITIES

art = art


Intuitivist philosophy…

  • recognizes that it is the nature of art to be conceptual
  • recognizes that form is as important as concept
  • recognizes that successful artistic communication is dependent upon execution and form
  • believes that artistic ‘intention’ does not justify the efficacy of the work
  • believes that referential aspects do not justify the efficacy of the work
  • believes that medium or means do not justify something as art
  • believes that artistic effort does not translate into art if it must be explained beyond its own existence
  • maintains the viewer as co-creator of the work
  • maintains the viewer’s understanding and interpretation of a work to be as true as the artist’s intention for the work
  • knows that image alone cannot generate substance
  • thinks that art history can no longer be linear
  • differentiates between art-forms (i.e. painting, music, performance,  poetry etc.) on the basis of organization and individuation
  • does not position one art-form above or below any other in importance or relevance
  • perceives that removing ‘boundaries’ between art-forms is arbitrarily pretentious and tangential
  • perceives that removing ‘boundaries’ between ‘art’ and ‘life’ is arbitrarily pretentious and tangential
  • does not distinguish between ‘traditional’ and ‘nontraditional’ for the reason that such factors are irrelevant
  • seeks to avoid pursing self-evident factors of art and art-making
  • seeks to avoid well-intended logic mediated by preexisting structures
  • recognizes that popular success has no relation to artistic success
  • recognizes that monetary worth has no relation to artistic worth
  • recognizes that technology is not a virtue
  • recognizes that ‘viral’ is a term used to denote disease
  • recognizes that ‘social media’ is an oxymoron and that it is neither ‘social’ nor ‘media’
  • upholds an ongoing mistrust of society-at-large and group consensus for the reason that mass-culture and democracy have proven to be untrustworthy structures
  • believes that the ‘aura’ or originality of a work of art is not diminished by its reproduction or replication in this post-mechanical-reproduction age
  • believes that the potential for originality rests within the individual and cannot be outwardly fabricated or contrived
  • maintains that virtual (conceptual) experience cannot approach or replace physical (individual) experience

Intuitivist art…

  • can be made through any art-form or combination of art-forms
  • manifests as distinct art-forms for the purpose of distilling expression and refining communication
  • is not determined by any particular ‘style’, though a style may be perceivable
  • is not confined to pre-existing methods or techniques, though it may employ some
  • prioritizes fundamental elements of sensory perception (i.e. color, line, tone, harmony, movement) as the primary methods of communication and expression
  • is not made to be didactic
  • stems from the impetus of inspiration within the artist
  • is created firstly by the artist/transmitter and secondly by the viewer/receiver
  • is to be experienced rather than explained
  • opens a channel connecting inner and outer awareness within the artist and the viewer
  • merges past with future to create the present
  • in an end in and of itself

The Intuitivist artist…

  • draws from all of art history as desired
  • draws from personal interests, obsessions, and perceptions
  • utilizes the art-forms which best manifest their ideas, feelings, and vision
  • maintains individuality of vision
  • knows that what one wants to do is more important than what one should do
  • does not submit their art to the fancies or expectations of others
  • does not submit their art to any monetary impetus
  • develops inner skills and awareness, these being the fundamental tools through which one creates art
  • is an autodidact
  • accepts that what is in vogue is neither here nor there
  • does not create based on what is ‘old’ or ‘new’ or by any other conceptual dichotomies
  • does not create art for the purpose of being accepted or revered by any person or group
  • does not create art for social status or monetary gain
  • does not create art to prove a point or espouse an opinion
  • sees importance in composing images, signs, and symbols as updated forms of communication
  • uses art to communicate ideas and not vice versa
  • is aware of the marvelous within the mundane and vice versa
  • maintains receptivity in that it is a virtue
  • initiates activity in that it is a necessity
  • is aware that art-making begins and ends as a solo journey
  • may create art that has shamanic effects
  • perceives process and progress to be non-linear
  • recognizes the importance of art in the evolution of humanity
  • is a channel and medium transmitting and transmuting what is beyond (in)to what is before
  • feels the eternal need to create
  • knows the art to be paramount
Advertisements

Passing Thought-Clouds of Doubt Over The Artist “Is Present”

Some things I’ve thought while thinking about something I think is nothing

PRESENTING: ON: The Artist is Present
(crude thoughts regarding the 2010 spectacle)

  1. If doing nothing means doing art, does that mean art is nothing? Or that art means nothing?
  2. Not even Zen artists would say their art was “doing nothing”
  3. Controversial alternate title suggestion: The Audience is Present
  4. Is it “interactive art” if the interaction involves the audience sitting in front of the art? (In that case, I would have to assume all art is “interactive”)
  5. Is it “participatory art” if the participation involves the audience sitting in front of the art? (If so, I would have to assume all art is “participatory”)
  6. Is it “performance art” if the performance involves the audience sitting in front of the performance? (Isn’t that the traditional way to experience a performance?)
  7. Thoughts of the artist who wants to be present: What can I do that is the most nothing?
  8. My thoughts: It’s going to be a (really dumb) idea.
  9. Thoughts of the artist they call now “Is Present”: It’s really difficult to present nothing as art!
  10. My thoughts: That’s not an artistic justification.
  11. The artist presenting her thoughts about not being present: “It’s not like a painting: you have the painting, the next day its there. Performance, if you are missing it, you only have the memory…” (TED Talk 2015)
  12. My thoughts: “It’s like a performance: you see the performance, the next day it’s not there because you aren’t still seeing it. If you are missing it, you only have the memory…”
  13. Would your rather…See an artist sitting in a museum gallery or see a painting sitting on a gallery wall?
  14. Definition query: living sculpture or dead performance?
  15. Questionable implications: Is it “immaterial” art if the artist is material? (Wouldn’t it be more immaterial if the artist wasn’t present?)
  16. Equation theory #1: immaterial experience (in theory) + museum context (in reality) = art (in concept)
  17. Equation theory #2: concept + concept + concept = CONCEPT
  18. Ratio theory # 1: minimum materiality = maximum spirituality (this is not a new idea)
  19. Ration theory #2: minimum materiality = maximum art (this is apparently the new idea)
  20. Ratio theory #3: nothing = something (this is an obvious idea)
  21. I won a staring contest when I was a kid! Can I put that on my resume?
  22. I wonder…is she subtly commenting on the gallery-sitter profession?
  23. Wasn’t the myth of the starving artist tragic enough?
  24. The artist is so dedicated to her practice that she doesn’t eat while making art! The starving artist is the most dedicated artist of all!
  25. The artist is so dedicated to her practice that she holds it in while making art! I don’t suppose she had a catheter under her excessively long dress?
  26. I would cry too if I sat in line for hours to sit in front of someone sitting for hours
  27. Is making people cry an artistic accomplishment I should be aware of?
  28. If I don’t cry when the artist is present, does that make me aesthetically ignorant? Grossly insensitive? Hopelessly uneducated?
  29. Am I a bad person if I get nothing out of experiencing someone experiencing nothing?
  30. I cry out of sadness, happiness, shock, relief, ecstasy, boredom, and pain.
  31. Yet another example in art history of an exceptionally dumb idea becoming a huge popular success (remember The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living? No pun intended)
  32. This makes Damien Hirst’s dot paintings seem like a good idea
  33. This makes Damien Hirst’s dot paintings seem like something worth looking at (wouldn’t you rather see colorful dots painted by paid artist assistants than pay to see into the real eyes of a real artist?)
  34. Which is more artistic: 1,365 dots on canvas or 750 hours in a gallery? (at least a painting can kill two birds with one stone…)
  35. Decree Number One for the Validation of Performance Art as Art in Contemporary Art: the pinnacle of performance art is reached through exhibitionist feats of physical endurance (i.e. self-imposed suffering in the name of art; the greater the suffering, the greater the art)
  36. Who’s the better artist: Nitsch or Burden? Was Christ an artist?
  37. Christ complex, anyone?
  38. The martyrdom of the artist leads to the martyrdom of art
  39. The culmination of the cult of celebrity
  40. Who fucking cares that the artist is present the artist WAS present?

The Joshua Tree Lifecycle: Many Years Growing

JUST BEFORE THE RAINS CAME this late October, I found myself completing a series of paintings I have been occupied with creating during the past three years. Joshua Tree 5, the life-size, 3-dimensional painting of a Yucca Brevifolia at its peak maturity, was completed on October 27, 2016, outside my studio in Ojai, California. This completion marks the end of a pursuit to artistically interpret and depict the growth cycle of the Joshua Tree, a unique and now threatened species native to the California desert. The painting’s completion occurred just in time to bring its 8′ x 6′ frame indoors (now crammed in the corner of the living room behind my pearlescent Gretsch drumset)–for as I write this, drought-stressed Southern California is receiving much needed rain from the heavens.

Joshua Tree 5 / 2016 / mixed media on canvas / 96" x 72"
Joshua Tree 5 / 2016 / pencil, elastic patching compound, and oil on raw canvas / 96″ x 72″

The California desert landscape is inevitably a part of my experiential DNA. From traversing its expanse via the 395 for my pilgrimage to the Eastern Sierras nearly every year of my life, it has been irrevocably integrated into my nervous system and genetic (un)conscious awareness. Through the window of a moving vehicle I would watch them come and go, their home an vast stage upon which a centuries-long dance has been choreographed, unfolding in slow-moving time. During my first visit to Joshua Tree, California on October 12 of 2013 for a High Desert Test Sites event, I was once again enamored with the plant, entranced by each individual’s charisma dancing in the slowest of movements, snowflakes taking decades to melt. Within my wanderings that day in October, I centered in on this specific individual, which formed the basic reference for Joshua Tree 5:

The catalyzing individual for the series and muse for Joshua Tree 5. Photo taken October 2013 in Joshua Tree, CA

After returning from that brief journey into Joshua Tree turf, I devised the first rough schematics for the series in November of 2013:

joshua-tree-schematics-11-10-13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In mid April of 2014, I returned to Joshua Tree, my blue 1990 Volvo packed with art supplies and a blank 6′ x ~4′ canvas. I then haphazardly drove down tributaries of random dirt (sand) roads, seeking the perfect Joshua Tree to enlist as my subject for the first of 8 painting endeavors. Somewhere, rooted out in the middle of nowhere, off the driven path somewhere near but out of sight of the Integratron, I found the one. I set up my station, and began capturing it. After hours of absorbing hot unforgiving sun, canvas absorbing paint, me absorbing Joshua Tree spirit via nervous system, I had enough absorbed to return to the studio and complete the painting.

Beginning stages of Joshua Tree 3 in April 2014, the first painting of the series to be created
Beginning stage of Joshua Tree 4 in Joshua Tree, CA, April 2014. This was the first painting to be created, though it is no. 4 in the series
Joshua Tree 4 / 2014 / acrylic on canvas / 72" x 43"
Joshua Tree 4 / 2014 / acrylic on canvas / 72″ x 43″

It wasn’t until Spring of the subsequent year (after having moved back to Ojai after living in a strange, outsider place outside of Santa Clarita) that I was able to continue developing the series, on March 1st 2015 devising these schematics and estimates:

joshua-tree-project-scematics

At some point soon after I amassed the materials necessary, and, with the gracious help and knowledge of my father, constructed 7 canvases in the raw with redwood 1″x2″s (a wood which could, like the Joshua Tree itself, become rarer as climate change continues), yards and yards of raw cotton canvas, a gallon of gesso, and dozens of staples. Indeed, making art from scratch is an alchemical process of transmuting base materials into higher forms of existence and awareness.

Blank canvases, ranging from 8′ x 6′ to 8″x8″

Then on March 17th 2015, traveling in the family’s Lance c(r)amper with my father and 6 of the 7 blank canvases of varying but specific sizes (leaving behind the largest, for practical reasons), a large easel and the necessary art tools, I returned to the desert–this time to a closer and more familiar location: Red Rock Canyon State Park. I was pleased to find many a fine Joshua Tree specimens there to inform the rest of the series.

Brainstorming schematics post-plein air, in the sketchbook, to be used in the studio
The Muse and the Work
The Muse and the Work at Red Rock Canyon

 

The intermediary at work/play (photo Charles Evans)
Joshua Tree 3 / 2016 / oil on canvas / 48″ x 20″
(The decline) Joshua Tree 6 in progress
Joshua Tree 6 in progress
Joshua Tree 6 / 2015 / oil on canvas / 40″ x 40″
Joshua Tree 7 in progress
Joshua Tree 7 / 2015 / acrylic, india ink, enamel on canvas / 30″ x 73″

Although 3 years may seem like a stretched-out time-expanse within which to complete 8 paintings (granted, within that time span I worked on and completed many other works and several series, including the major Big Bugs), this amount of time constitutes perhaps  0.02% of the average lifespan of a Joshua Tree. According to the National Park Service, the average lifespan is estimated to be 150 years–but there are certainly individuals who are much older, reaching upwards of 300 years!

So (alas) I am but a short-lived small-fry in the shadow of this magnificent species, individuals of which were born before me and will (hopefully) continue after I am gone!

Well, perhaps my smallness isn’t that sad–but what is unnerving is the growing fragility of these natives within their habitat, Yucca Brevifolia now being classified as a threatened species (U.S. Forest Service). This is due to factors ranging from deliberate human destruction (i.e. the removal of over 200,000 trees in the 1980’s for development), to unavoidable climate change (currently the drought being the most significant offender). According to recent investigations into their well-being, “Many Joshua trees in the region have not reproduced in decades. If warmer, drier conditions continue, scientific modeling suggests the symbols of California’s deserts will lose 90% of their range in the 800,000-acre park and surrounding terrain by the end of the century”  (Los Angeles Times). As with many other desert creatures, their specific environmental needs, slow growing patterns, and particular lifecylce inhibit their ability to adapt quickly to change. Though it has existed since the era when gigantic sloths roamed the earth (Wikipedia), its continuation as a species on Earth is currently at stake given the current circumstances. I wonder if the Prophet Joshua, whom the pioneering Mormons named the plant after (Desert USA), could have prophesied this fate, its home a Promised Land of its own.

Red Rock Canyon, in full bloom after mild spring rains, March 2015

Three years ago, when the initial spark of inspiration was ignited and I began The Joshua Tree Lifecycle, I was not aware–nor was it within the awareness of the general public–that the fate of Yucca Brevifolia is at stake. At the time, I sensed the Joshua Tree to be an iconic, completely unique and unrepeatable entity, the beauty of which merits attention, appreciation, awareness, and ultimately conservation. It has been just within the past year, during the bulk of my work on the series, that the Joshua Tree was brought under the umbrella of the Endangered Species Act. I hope my artistic efforts will be a vehicle for increased awareness and appreciation of their enigmatic beauty as an irreplaceable icon of the Southern California desert.

Joshua Tree 2 / 2015 / acrylic on canvas / 24″ x 20″

Before and after it all, there is the inevitable reality of timelessness: of fractal movements which spiral up and out but which always double back on themselves, as demonstrated by this Polaroid, taken at an indefinable time:

celeste-m-evans-polariod
A blast from the…..present?!? #doeslinearhistoryexist?

The Lifecycle, start to finish

See the complete series on my website here

Quotes and Questions from the Kingdom

QUOTES FROM ARTISTS come in handy as quick injections of encouragement and clarity for the artist and non-artist alike. An insight encapsulated in a few concise sentences functions much like an image in that it can be grasped in a moment, and also ruminated over for many moments. With instantaneousness  being a definitive operative of today’s world, short messages can be highly effective transmitters of meaning. This effectiveness is manifest in the longevity of proverbs from ages past, the short-lived posts on social media, the popularity of quotation websites, and the endless array of inspirational quotes set to generic background images on Google Images. In many ways, quotes from notable people of recent times circulating throughout society function similarly to passages in the Bible, with both at times being easily misconstrued and misinterpreted–sometimes with disastrous results.

Interpretations of meaningful messages–whether from the Bible or the latest pop star–act as catalysts for the unfolding and making of culture and history. Mass-awareness can be been altered by an influential person’s words–for better or worse. Horrible prejudices have been constructed and wars waged based upon negative interpretations of positive words. Individuals have been wrongly venerated or condemned based upon what they have said. What someone says within the narrow window of a few words can in fact reveal a large totality of their perspectives and understandings. And how that is interpreted by other people is a whole other can of worms. A few words strung together equal more than the sum of their parts–just as in art, a few colors on a canvas are more than just those separate colors: a total unique art piece is created upon their collaboration.

White Center (Yellow, Pink, and Lavender on Rose) / Mark Rothko / 1950 / oil on canvas / 81" x 56"
White Center (Yellow, Pink, and Lavender on Rose) / Mark Rothko / 1950 / oil on canvas / 81″ x 56″

The combination of warm colors juxtaposed in differing amounts and intensities in this Rothko has a unique effect on the viewer which is more than the sum of its parts. The colors in shape and composition are unified into a distinct, autonomous entity

Now with internet platforms like Twitter and Instagram, everyone can be spewing out their own quotations every couple of seconds to the world. This may be the culminations of a wide-spread triumph of freedom of speech. But I still find myself questioning: what effect does this have on the actual efficacy of people’s words? Can the virtual nature of internet communication reveal the unavoidable disconnect between words and reality: that what someone says (online or otherwise) isn’t always demonstrated by their actions? Are Twitter users actually saying what they mean, or are their chatty intentions coming from the push to get ‘followers’ (which is essentially how politicians now operate)? Does the internet make everyone into an authority based on what they say and on how many ‘followers’ they have (which reminds me a bit of cult dynamics)? Finally, does social media have the power to make everyone into journalists, politicians, celebrities, or even Artists? 

These are all questions which (as someone who doesn’t know the answers) I can’t help but throwing out there. I find it interesting if not disconcerting that it seems very few people today are questioning these currents which surround and often engulf us. We are consumed by the novel powers of the internet and social media–yet do we really know what we are engaging with? The unknowing and ever-questioning perspective of the child–and also of the Artist–can’t help but inquire into the underlying nature of things past, present, and future.

Picasso is famously quoted saying, “Every child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist one one grows up”. He also said, It took me four years to paint like Raphael, but a lifetime to paint like a child”. I assert (as do many other Artists) that the importance of retaining and utilizing the child-perspective is crucial to art-making–and perhaps living in general. “Growing up” in society essentially entails giving up one’s childhood perspectives in favor of a rational (i.e. limited, compromised, and standardized) understanding and acceptance of the world and existence. Being an ‘adult’ thus becomes a drab, tiresome, repetitive, and dampening affair. Despite expectations and appearances, I believe it is a type of psychosis: one afflicted by the ‘adult’ disease is out of touch with a crucial part of their own personal reality–an understanding and acceptance of the magic of the universe which is obvious to the child. Any sensitive ‘adult’ knows to never squash the magic awareness of the child–yet why is the ‘adult’ expected to give up their personal, inner reality in favor of a standardized, consensus reality based upon left-brained logic? Is it really necessary to give up one’s original, individual perception in order to ‘fit in’ and be a ‘functioning adult’ in society? (Perhaps!) And now, as the Postmodern and conceptual hoopla has been hammered into art for decades, nearly nailing the coffin shut, Artists have been subtly coerced into to giving up subjective awareness in their art in favor of presenting and proving objective, socially justifiable reasons for their art. Art at large has become mentally ill with the ‘adult’ psychosis, where institutional, rational, and politically correct authority reigns supreme, and ‘fitting in’ objectively trumps the expression of subjective, personal ideas.

(unfinished childhood piece) / 2002 / acrylic on canvas board / 16" x 20"
(unfinished childhood piece) / 2002 / acrylic on canvas board / 16″ x 20″

Before and after images of Unfinished Childhood Picture 7

Unfinished Childhood Picture 7 / 2001/2015 / acrylic on board / 16" x 20"
Unfinished Childhood Picture 7 / 2002/2015 / acrylic on board / 16″ x 20″

Above is a piece from my Unfinished Childhood Pictures, a series in which I resurrected 10 artworks I began between 1997 and 2002, but which were abandoned before completion. In 2015 I ‘finished’ these 10 works, including the one above, which depicts a rather naive interpretation of inter-species interaction. As an 11-year-old, it didn’t matter nor occur to me that zebras and tigers don’t exist together in the ‘real’ world; my awareness at the time was more focused on the (obvious) aesthetic relationships and also discrepancies between zebras and tigers. At that transitional time (from child into preteen awareness), with my creative perspectives being challenged by the impeding adult-minded demands of rational and responsible reality, I was unable to complete the work. When I returned to it nearly 15 years later, I infused it with the irrational rainbow-aesthetics common to (my) early childhood perception.

Evolving as a human involves going both forward and backward in time: it is a movement towards infinity, entering the Kingdom of Heaven. The Bible states: “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven…whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it” (Mark 10:45, 15). From an Artist’s (and mortal human’s) perspective, I suggest that the Kingdom of Heaven is to be found within the earthly realm, and upon having the receptivity, curiosity, and questioning of a child, one will be able to see the wonders of the world as they are: mysterious, magical and wondrous beyond limiting comprehension. To quote the book I am reading (which, along with many other good books, was passed along to me from Michael Melville), Ego and Archetype by Edward F. Edinger, ” The child signifies the young, underdeveloped aspect of the personality, that which is fresh, spontaneous, and not yet fixed in rigid patterns” (Edinger pg. 144). For the child, everything is changing and new–the truth of the universe which creativity emanates from.

When I was (physically) a child, my desire to make art came from my interest and intrigue in the world around me. I am finding, after having gone through those necessarily weird, ego-seeking transitional teenage years, into ‘young adulthood’ attending art school, to being in the ‘real world’ as an ‘adult’ with ‘responsibility’, that my interest in making art still comes from the same place and same desires. Despite having endured four years of art school straight out of high school, where the pressure to make ‘responsible’ art–art that is historically logical (i.e. Postmodern), art that is ‘responsive’ to artistic issues (i.e. addressing inflated intellectual concerns), and/or art that is ‘politically correct’ (i.e. challenging racial stereotypes) –was paramount, I find myself desiring to return to the receptive (rather than contrived) perspectives of the child. This is generally discouraged in school, art-related or not, which I believe is a  reason why the school systems in America, from elementary to college, are failing. Children love learning, while adults already know everything–so naturally, if schools are teaching adult perspectives, they are shooting themselves in the foot. People who know everything already (i.e. adults) don’t want or need to go to school, right? And in addition, why would they want or need art, which ideally shows us things we don’t normally or already perceive? And since everyone already knows everything via Google search via their iPhone in their pocket, who needs to ask questions anymore? (Does Ask Jeeves still exist?!!?).

What Artists have to say in words is as illuminating as the art they make. It is undoubtedly part of their artistic practice and should be taken into account as such. More often than not, if one likes an Artist’s work, they will be interested in what they have to say. But can someone be an ‘Artist’ based upon their words–can someone be an ‘Artist’ on social media and have that also be the truth in the physical (artistic) realm? Can someone be an Artist just because they say so? Don’t they need actual art (which involves more than just saying a few words) to back up their self-proclaimed genius status and evidence of supporters (i.e. ‘followers’)? Does it really mean anything when Kanye West says “I am Warhol. I am the No. 1 most impactful artist of our generation. I am Shakespeare in the flesh”. Does it really mean or do anything for an Artist to have 1 million followers on Instagram? Do people now, and will generations to come, equate Kanye with his word, or will we come to understand that words are no replacement for artistic efficacy in the tangible world? Will all the instantaneous tweets and spontaneous (though premeditated) instant posts add up to creating someone’s legitimacy or legacy? Will people of the future take an Artist’s words more seriously than their artistic output? Is Kanye Shakespeare in the flesh simply because he says so?

Of note, Kanye is also quoted saying, “The most successful artists are closest to who they were when they were 5 years old or 4 years old or 3 years old”. There is validity in that sentiment. And perhaps Kanye is speaking his truth: perhaps he was as self-interested and impulsive with words when he was 3, 4, and 5 years old as he is now!

As a conclusion, I must include the corrected version of a well-known proverb, which apparently dates back to the 14th century: “The proof in the pudding is in the eating”.

Big Bug IV (The Static Fly Paradox)

AS THE IMPENDING HEAT DRAGGED IN the closure of June, I found myself attaining the completion of not only a significant painting, but conclusively a series of paintings which I conceptually began in summer of 2012. Immersed in the rising temperature of summer amplified within the confines of my studio-garage, my activated sweat attracted a buzzing fly as I finalized the last of the Big Bugs series. I was appropriately accompanied by this fly perched delicately on my leg as I applied the last stroke of paint to Big Bug IV at 2:30 PM, June 29th, 2016:

582 Big Bug IV
Big Bug IV / 2016 / oil, acrylic, and India ink on canvas / 44″ x 44″

Simply put, The Static Fly Paradox is a representation of (what I describe as) the quantum (meta)physical idea that something can be both flying in the way of continuous motion, and also fixed–static. Static takes on its own paradoxical double meaning in that it describes something fixed and also something which is in constant, undifferentiated motion (as with T.V. static). The latter form of static literally flies through the air, invisible until it is properly received (much like ideas which are invisible until are ‘received’ into an art-form), and appearing as an substrate of wriggling dots until it is organized into recognizable form. The fly is static in both senses of the term: it is in constant, repetitive yet aimless motion while simultaneously appearing as a fixed, unchanging yet functioning form.

Here are some pictorial anecdotes as to how I channeled the invisible static of pure ideas into a paradoxical static fly:

celeste-m-evans-fly-1celeste-m-evans-fly-7 celeste-m-evans-fly-6celeste-m-evans-fly-2 celeste-m-evans-fly-3 celeste-m-evans-fly-4celeste-m-evans-fly-8582 Big Bug IV

And more fly inspiration:

“Wait a minute, wait a minute! I’m having a fly experience here! Look at this!“:

See the other three Big Bugs here