Faculty Profile
|
Department: Printmedia
Courses: Intermediate/ Advanced Lithography & Intermediate/ Advanced
Screenprinting
BFA: Trenton State College, NJ
MFA: The School of the Art Institute of Chicago, IL
Recent Shows:
Group Printmedia Exhibition
The Elmhurst Art Museum, IL
Solo Show
Weak & Greasy Gallery, IL
Collaboration with Carlos Cortez
Chicago Cultural Center, IL
Other Notable Shows:
2000 Anchor Graphics Print Auction and Benefit
Anchor Graphics, IL
The Print USA Exhibition
Springfield Art Museum, MO
National Printmaking Exhibition
Hollman Gallery, NJ
Print Exchange & Permanent Collections
Tokyo National University of
Fine Arts & Music, Japan
Recent Work:
Dhikt
a self published book of unmailed letters available locally at
Quimby's (1854 W. North Avenue)
Current Projects:
The Chemical Process or Reading From the Book of Sadness
45 min. stop
animation film set in a 1/10th scale lithography shop. Set for a 2005
release.
Small Edition
15 min. stop animation video using the set of The
Chemical Process. Participating in an exhibition touring Europe in fall
2002.
|
interview by emily evans
"Everything." - wrik repasky
What is art?
This sounds like one of those trick questions even though
I'm conscious that it's an extremely important question. I'm not sure
if I'm the person to define what ART is but I can attempt to explain
what it means to me today. I was in the Princeton University bookstore
about 10 years ago, when a man asked me that same question for no
apparent reason. Off the top of my head I told him something along the
lines of art being a misconception that someone can do or understand
something that you can't and you admire them for it. It was almost
clever and he accepted it. I don't think I believe that anymore, if I
ever did. I followed the Ad Reinhardt's "art is art and everything else
is everything else" for a while. I admire him quite a lot but it was a
righteous way of thinking. I don't think I fully believe in that
anymore either. At one time I was fascinated with Immanuel Kant's
"knowledge of beauty" and "aesthetic values." I still enjoy Kurt
Vonnegut's comparison of artists to canaries in coal mines. I think
John Cage makes sense. Damien Hirst and the YBA movement has made me
smile for the last couple of years. You would expect if anyone
understood what art is an artist would be able to explain it, but I
suppose if you asked a dozen artists what exactly it is you'd get a
dozen unique answers. It's expression as well as emotion. It's cerebral
and it's theory. It's a language with syntax and semantics. It exists
in physical forms sometimes and other times it doesn't. It's a level of
skill and achievement. It's an economy. It's an occupation. It's
inclusive as well as exclusive. It can be spiritual. It can be
criminal. It can help you find clarity. It can drive you mad. It's
information. It's an atmosphere and it's an attitude. It can be the
furniture we sit on and the environments we inhabit. It's underfunded.
Is there a difference between personal art & art meant for display?
Absolutely. But the difference between the two can be very fluid at
times and very difficult to define. Whether an object or an idea is
designated private or for the public is often determined by the intent
of, as well as the decisions made by, the creator or the originator. I
think a responsibility exists on the part of the artist to define their
their own intentions. Some artists have experienced a moment of clarity
and then burned or destroyed everything that preceded it. Writers have
requested that their unpublished works be destroyed while on their
deathbeds. Many artists have been exploited posthumously. I think about
Henry Darger and how he stayed true to his intention of creation
without ever giving in to the desire to share it. I think about the
individuals who live constantly in the lens of a webcam, their every
moment broadcast for anyone to view it. Regardless of the many and
irreplaceable benefits to the many, what a thing is or what it should
be always comes back to the definitions and intentions of the
originator. However, once something is given to the world it can
fortunately never be taken back.
How does Dhikt relate to, or deal with, this difference?
This is an interesting question. Dhikt is
essentially an epistolary made up of undelivered and unrealized
missives. They were originally intended to be received by specific
individuals. Theywere the very definition of private. There would be no
way to publish them as I found them in notebooks, sketchbooks, and on
scraps of paper. By publishing it Dhikt was also an attempt to redefine
my ever-increasing postal silence in lieu of my love affair with snail
mail. I had wanted to construct something that could be embraced on
many levels and at the same time remain personal almost to the point of
resisting comment. It wasn't a simple thing to achieve and many
decisions were not easy. There were a number of partial letters that
could not be included for a number of reasons and were disposed of.
Some were sent years after the fact to who they were intended for. I
had considered addressing all of the subject material to one fictitious
individual but knew it wasn't what I was after. I had wanted them to
remain as they were - personal, sentimental, humorous, reflective of
the relationships and connections I have to the people who should have
gotten them. I've read some of the published letters of Franz Kafka,
Flannery O'Connor, William Burrows and Charles Bukowski, among others.
They left me feeling odd in a voyeuristic way. I had hoped by
obfuscating any reference to specific individuals outside of popular
culture references that a reader would eventually and literally begin
to fill in the blanks and possibly feel in a small way that Dhikt was
speaking directly to them in the way any other written format has the
potential to.
Why self publish?
It's a more immediate solution for what I'm after and
who I am - artist, printmaker, bookmaker, interested in language and
writing. I'm concerned with working through an idea quickly when it
reaches an acceptable point in its development to test its points of
failing. Writing shouldn't be any more difficult than any other medium
but I find myself vacillating within the pages for no apparent reason
at times. I'm not interested in the biblio-therapy aspects of putting a
written book together - what I need to know is how appropriate writing
is for me in book form vis-a-vis typical textless solutions. The faster
I can execute an end the sooner I can make decisions and improve.
Coming from a foundation in the democratic processes and a clear
understanding of multiples, the time required to assemble a book, or a
100 books, is far less than it takes to compose what's inside. Putting
together an overview and a 2-chapter treatment to shop around for a
publisher doesn't interest me much right now. The success of the
message does. If everyone has a book inside them, would mine be worth
reading?
Lithography Press for The Chemical Process
|
Why did you come to SAIC?
That's kind of a long story. My
brother, Steve, moved to Chicago during a phase when I had put my
undergrad study on pause. I fell in love with the city during my first
visit and spent as much time here as I could afford to. At the same
time I was working in a commercial print shop in New Jersey. It was
through this position I ended up attending a graphics industry
convention in Philadelphia. Our employer had sent us with no budget and
it was truly a field trip with no goal. I left the convention and ended
up in what I believed to be the graduate studios at the University of
Pennsylvania. I had this overwhelming desire to work on that level.
Soon after that experience another one occurred where I found myself in
the Columbus building of SAIC after unknowingly making my way through
the Art Institute. ... This was where I wanted to study. I quit my job
as soon as I was able, returned to my undergrad studies with the
intention of finishing only as a way to continue on a higher platform,
accumulated a specialization in printmaking while pursuing my BFA,
applied to and [was] accepted [to] the Printmedia department of SAIC.
In 2000 I enthusiastically agreed to return to the Printmedia
department when given the opportunity to teach Intermediate/ Advanced
Lithography and later Intermediate/ Advanced Screenprinting as well.
Why do you teach?
This question always reminds me of that scene in the
first Rocky film where the TV interviewer asks Rocky why he boxes and
he responds because he can't sing and he can't dance. I realized early
on that teaching was something I would like to pursue. Specifically,
teaching printmedia above anything else. If everyone has a model
environment, I'd liked to think teaching the mediums of printmaking is
mine. It's not the only element in my life that I define myself by but
I find it truly rewarding. I adore nearly every aspect of it from the
first impression of ink pulled by someone to being pushed to expand my
own understanding of the media as well as where it all historically
began. I enjoy finding solutions to production issues and goals I
wouldn't necessarily come across in my own work. I truly enjoy how a
room full of individuals can push the same thought in so many
directions. The few really good teachers I was fortunate enough to work
with in my own education made such an invaluable impact on not only the
work I make but who I am. I suppose it's idealistic to think I may be
able to do the same thing for someone else someday.
What is the best part about working with students?
Witnessing their growth. There's a
responsibility that's connected to the transmission of information from
generation to generation. There's a serious contribution to be made not
only to their immediate art efforts but also hopefully their ways of
seeing, examining, their choices, who they become and their eventual
roles within any given community. It's tremendously rewarding to see
the young and the dumb transform into the fantastically clever and the
shockingly brilliant while having a minor role in that transformation.
What is the worst part?
Students who treat their education like a
burden. It's disheartening to deal with students who are only
interested in obtaining credit or a degree through the minimum amount
of effort. They fail to realize that SAIC isn't only about making art.
It's also very much about the re-examination of art and acclimating
oneself to an art community not only as a participant but also as a
contributor. It's finding a way to intelligently articulate your
thoughts and ideas. It's about seeking out undiscovered ground and then
breaking it. It's about becoming the caretaker of collective
traditions, memories and histories. It's not only about becoming
art-stars but designers, gallery owners, archivalists,
conservationists, critics, coordinators, buyers, graphic novelists,
producers, writers, directors, researchers, educators.
What inspires you?
Everything. I understand that's not much of an
answer but there's no simple way to explain the range of various things
and different people that inspire me.
Who is your favorite super hero?
There's no definitive answer for this.
It's either Eiji Tsuburaya's original Ultraman or Simon Weisenthal, the
holocaust survivor who committed himself to personally hunting down
Adolf Eichman and well over 1,100 other war criminals.
What song always gets stuck in your head?
The Girl From Ipanema.
Sometimes it stays in there for days. I hate that song.
|
