Posted
by Jill Ensley
January 17, 2009 at 7:01 p.m.
Cranky Rambles McGinty
This right here was supposed to be the culmination of my deep, semi-poetic feelings on the start of the new year, on New Orleans slowness, and on the intended do-goodery of Make It Right. But, I woke up cranky this morning and three iced coffees haven't changed that. The only real solution at this point, is to flush it out by subjecting you all to my cranky ramblings. (That, and drinking. But we'll get to that soon enough. It's Carnival season man. I have to train.) Stay tuned next week for something more meaningful...So, I'm really sick of shallow hipster art. And I realize some people will read into this and think I'm talking about them. Rest your pretty heads, I'm probably not. But, I am tired of 80's culture being co-opted by children born in the 80's. I was born in '77 and I don't use that shit in my work. I don't use the 70's either. And I wouldn't. Know why? 'Cause I was BORN in 1977. I can barely claim to identify with the 80's. (That, and the 70's sucked.) Maybe it's all this Prospect.1 bullshit. I'm tired of seeing youth and confusion trump talent and meaning.And I realize "in this economy" things are difficult. We all have bills to pay and for people trying to make it as artists it's even harder, considering how much it costs to be an artist. But when I see things like The Colton School in a town full of whole neighborhoods going to waste from 3+ years of total disregard and a general lack of good public schools, it's hard to be a champion for the artists. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for more places for artistic interaction. New Orleans needs artistic outlets. New Orleans IS an artistic outlet. But there has to be some happy medium. You can't just take from this city. Not anymore. And when I see glamorous photo shoots of young artistic mavens, perched and lit like a windblown model in the midst of darkening St. Roch streets, all in the goddamned NY Times Style Magazine, I get a little pissed off at misplaced or ignored good intentions. Especially when the notion has been floated around that some of her properties for this artistic mavenry were purchased with HUD money. This is a town of many layers, and like politics, digging in the lead-filled dirt of the arts will only lead to more dirt. And speaking of lead, at least some good is coming out of KKProjects, or at least happening in proximity.What am I trying to say? I don't know. Only that if you're gonna build a big damned ark in the middle of the Lower 9, why don't you make it functional. Because god knows we'll probably need it someday. (Here is where I thank the Corps for taking their sweet ass time in closing MR-GO)Maybe I'm just looking at all of this the wrong way. So, tomorrow, before it all closes and the art world moves on to another city (like Godzilla), I'll give it a second chance.The reality of this cheers me up though:http://media.lawrence.com/img/blogs/e.... Look, I'm a big fan of ordinary people doing extraordinary things. I teared up hearing about the sheer goodness and capability of someone doing their job so well, and caring so much, that it saved EVERYONE involved, but....gross. Just, what the shit? We're like monkeys with a new toy and this internet thing, flinging poo all over and charging $5 for people to eat it.
and 1 others
Comments
Lawrence.com does not necessarily agree with comments posted below - responsibility lies with the relevant user alone. Read our full policy.
alm77 (anonymous) says…
I was born in 77 as well and I can't believe your statement that "I can barely claim to identify with the 80's" Are you joking? That's age 3-13 for you, i.e. your ENTIRE childhood. *The* most formative years of your life. My Little Pony, Cabbage Patch kids, leg warmers, crimped hair, Michael J. Fox? None of this you can identify with?? I'm guessing your view of this time period may reveal (unintentionally) the actual root of this "Cranky Rambles" as well as your other less-than-hopeful blog entries I've read. On the other hand, I'm fed up with naysayers and pettiness from other sources at the moment, so I may just be taking it out on you. ;p
godjilla (Jill Ensley) says…
I didn't say I can't identify at all, I said barely.And I'm glad that's all you got from that, that my lack of being one with leg warmers leads to an unfulfilled life.Crankiness all around. Let's drink.
DOTDOT (anonymous) says…
Ya'll shut up. The 70's are MINE goddammit.
godjilla (Jill Ensley) says…
Dots, they're all yours.
DOTDOT (anonymous) says…
Carry me back
alm77 (anonymous) says…
"my lack of being one with leg warmers leads to an unfulfilled life" Actually, I'm pretty sure I said your unhappy childhood has made you a pessimist. I just tried to put it lightly. C'mon JILL!! Today and tomorrow are giving all kinds of people hope all over the place!! Cheer the fuck up and forgive the "bad" art. You said yourself that you wrote this to get it out of your system, to put it out there, to sound off so that you can move on. Most days I enjoy your Eeyore blogs. I guess I'm just pissed about the timing.
OtherJoel (anonymous) says…
Whoa, alm. I think that's the first time (that I'm aware) of you dropping the f-bomb on the blogs! And f is for fun, so I fully support it. Fuckin' a, man.However I also support crankiness in all its wonderful forms, so I say keep on cranky ramblin', Jill. And get off my lawn, you damned kids!Just popping in to make a couple of completely non-productive observations. That's what I do best. You're both the bees' knees. Or twelve of the bees' knees. Whatever.... Hugz - OJ
OtherJoel (anonymous) says…
OK, my serious response:As always when the subject of art comes up, I think of what I am most familiar with: music. And the parallels are valid, I think. You have some really talented people trying to create something original and meaningful, but most of them will never see any recognition for their efforts. Then you have bands like the Killers (first example that comes to mind) that decide "hey! the 80s are in, let's do that!" Then ten other bands get their 15 minutes riding the coattails of the coattails. And when you see such a vapid excuse for art receive all that attention, it can't help but make you a tad bitter if you consider yourself an artist with any level of conviction. I am by no means a master of the musical art form, but I do try to at least write what feels right vs. what I think will make money and make me famous -- primarily to meet my own, highly subjective (like anyone's), definition of "art." So seeing such obvious pandering to passing trends being rewarded pisses me off as well. I can't imagine what it would be like if I actually had talent.
Shelby (anonymous) says…
I'm no fan of the Killers, OJ, but I think they might actually like the music they record. I think they might do it because it makes them happy and they're not just doing it because it will sell.Which i guess is slightly lame but slightly commendable. Maybe.
OtherJoel (anonymous) says…
True Shelby, but remember - I used the Killers only as a means to illustrate my point. If they are sincere and are making music that means something to them, then obviously I should have picked someone else. But there are bands that clearly get into the game to make money and latch on to the next big fad. They are who I am talking about, and everyone has their opinion of who those bands/artists are, and probably few of us can ever agree completely on that.So basically I'm just talking out me arse.
alm77 (anonymous) says…
okay, okay, okay... I'll bite. In my honest opinion, all this "Ugh, the 80's", is misdirected. Call me a free market capitalist, but really, if this music and art sucks so bad, then I would venture to guess that "good" artists have a completely different (tasteful) audience than those who are producing crap. In other words, those who putting down Franklins for crap probably aren't going to buy your great art anyway, right? So, let 'em.
godjilla (Jill Ensley) says…
almsy, actually I had a pretty damn good childhood, so get outta the armchair, mang! :p And I think I have a chemical imbalance (I wish I were joking. And yes, I'm looking into actually doing something about it. Should I mention these really personal things on the blogs? Probably not, but here's to Hope and Change, right?)I really think OJ summed it up in a more productive manner for me. I was just flailing and angry the past couple days. It's frustrating to feel like art consumes your brain with such force and then see people half-ass it and succeed, that's all. The 80's are just the current soup du jour. That, and it's my G.D. duty to roll my eyes at those younger than me sometimes. All that said, I nearly cried 3 times listening to NPR on the way home. I think you know why and I wish I had the whole day off tomorrow.Here's something we could all use after Hope and Change wear off: http://www.drankbeverage.com
OtherJoel (anonymous) says…
The issue (in my opinion) is more about motivation and process than anything. If you happen to make a living at your artistic endeavors, more power to you. But if the economic factor is what drives you, I find it hard to see any sincerity in that. It is contrived to achieve a predetermined end. From what I have seen, that's the kind of work that tends to sell. And yes, this sounds a bit arrogant to say, but most people don't know how to really appreciate artistic talent -- I confess my own lack of an ability to effectively evaluate most visual media, tending towards the "Gee, um, I know what I like when I see it" level of critique. Basically, I think art (in the generic) is one of the areas where the regular rules of the free market aren't really appropriate, even if you accept the proposition that capitalism is the ideal (and honestly, as much as I hate what it sometimes produces, it does fit human nature better than any other economic system we've come up with). A product that has use value (forgive the Marxist terminology) has objective, easily understandable purposes. A piece of art is an egoistic exercise -- the "end user" is typically not of much concern -- as it should be. But does it have value? No question about it. Enrichment of culture, encouraging creativity, keeping us from becoming nothing more than a bunch of stats-crunching drones... It is fundamentally essential to our existence, now more than ever. But is it really quantifiable, and therefore conducive to our increasingly profit-minded world? Not so much. Wow. I suddenly kicked into rambly mode -- it's been a while.That said, I AM really excited about tomorrow. I am certainly not one of those people who think Obama will save us all, but I will be dancing a happy dance that that little chimp-faced bastard will finally be sent back to Crawford.
OtherJoel (anonymous) says…
In response to the above link:"Drank is the perfect lifestyle beverage for those who can appreciate extreme relaxation."extreme relaxation. yeah! awesome!(zzzzzzzzzz....)
alm77 (anonymous) says…
Okay, so now I see a bunch of morons cycling through Drank and Rockstar (side note: when looking up the name of an energy drink, I found that Playboy has one, what??) Jill, HA! I don't mind the personal information, as long as it's not in a myspace bulletin. hehe. and I stand by my premise and will take it further to say that if you *did* have a happy childhood than you CAN claim the 80's and MAYBE that's why you *should* be pissed (don't eff with my happy childhood!!(is that better, OJ?)) Just a thought. OJ, my point still stands, the consumers who, eh hem, consume bad art aren't going to support the good artists either way. Having said that, government grants do not discriminate "good" from "bad" art, no? Maybe that would put a wrench in my argument. So on that note, JILL, what's your take on this Secretary of Culture or Secretary of the Arts that Quincy Jones is lobbying BHO for??
godjilla (Jill Ensley) says…
OJ, damn....you should ramble more often. And maybe that's a little of what was getting my panties in a bunch. I see a lot of hustling down here, in general and in the art world and I understand people need to make a living, but...but, but, but. But what? I don't know. It's just, dishonest? I mean, you know honest work when you see it...or at least most people do, on some level. Not that I won't, or haven't, made some work that I know will sell (some fleur & crescent flavored, if you will), but it comes from an honest place and it's not my schtick, not my definition. And the "know what I like when I see it" level of critique is a lot more acceptable than you think. I started out with that mode of thinking, went through all this art history shit and it made me think everything was good. I lost my ability to be instantly affected and objective, could read into anything. So, knee-jerk reactionism is sometimes good in that it gives you strong feelings about the work, and you can choose to stop there or delve deeper to figure out why you like/dislike something. What was the point? What are they trying to say? Is it just poorly executed? It's why there are so many artists. Because you can't please everyone and sometimes it's just about finding a match. I sold two pieces recently that I hadn't sold before just because it affected someone on a personal level. That felt good.alm, OH man, this Secretary or The Arts thing is a baaad idea and I hope it doesn't go very far. I mean, there are just some things the government shouldn't have their hands in (or that much control over) and I'm not entirely sure what the benefits would be...other than a winding road to light fascism. Also, the Stephen Seagal energy drink is also awesome.
leslie (Leslie vonHolten) says…
That Jerry Saltz quote I'm a day late and dollar short with, but helps me keep perspective:"Much of the work we currently call political is political in subject matter only. It's message is ardent, if obvious, but its form is generally conservative, often regressive, and rarely original. If it weren't about the 'right' things, most of this art world would be seen as reactionary or dull. Picasso mainly painted still lives and nudes; Warhol, flowers and faces. Matisse claimed painting should be a 'comfortable armchair,' and Donald Judd made boxes. Yet all are revolutionary because they changed the way the world looks and the way we look at the world. The sooner we grasp this, the sooner the big, well-funded extravaganzas of contemporary art will stop resembling movable cultural cargo cults."The nostalgia of 20-30 somethings is cheap. (Nostalgia is pretty fucking cheap, period.)Also: No to the Cultural Ministry, and I have no experience with energy drinks.
leslie (Leslie vonHolten) says…
BTW, where are all the cats?
alm77 (anonymous) says…
I think they ran away after I asked if I could have a cat... But Aretha Franklin let me borrow her inauguration hat!! :D
godjilla (Jill Ensley) says…
Oh man, you're the second person I've seen in the last hour to have donned that chapeau. Well done.Leslie, it was worth the wait. Great quote. "Yet all are revolutionary because they changed the way the world looks and the way we look at the world. The sooner we grasp this, the sooner the big, well-funded extravaganzas of contemporary art will stop resembling movable cultural cargo cults." How does one become revolutionary? Is it only in hindsight or is it achieved with your gut and not your mind. Is revolutionary work merely the work of the genuine, the honest, the authentic? And what if you use nostalgia to say something that is genuine about the present or the future? Is that cheap? Or is it merely a case-by-case basis. I don't know. I'm just thinking.Some great photos from yesterday: http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2009...
DOTDOT (anonymous) says…
discaimer: i, like OJ, have little understanding of the visual arts, and base everything I say on the fact that there are parallels between the visual arts and music, which I understand except for the B52s. If the cosmos determines that there are actually NO parallels between the two, then never mind. Thank you for your patience.__________________________________________________________"Is revolutionary work merely the work of the genuine, the honest, the authentic? "Yes. Without the merely.The internets have acccelerated the pace at which shit (as exemplified by the commenting persona of DOTDOT) reaches our eyes and ears, but I believe there is no higher percentage of shit than there ever was. Shit is constant because we as a species need a lot of shit. If you allow yourself too much time to consider the shit, whether to wallow or decry, the shit can occupy your productive time. In other words, your work can be affected by the shit. When your own work is thus driven by shit, the danger is that your work can actually become shit. (I am including the body of work that doesn't get done because of the preoccupation with shit. There is nothing shittier than unfinished work).This is not something that "happens" to artists or art. It is a choice. And DON"T ask me how I know so much about shit.
alm77 (anonymous) says…
holy.shit. When the dots are profound, does that mean I've taken too much time to consider this shit? ;) But you are right, things that didn't take much thought to produce, shouldn't claim much consideration as a final product. Well said!