Tom Moody
Since 2002
Works in New York, New York United States of America

Discussions (244) Opportunities (0) Events (0) Jobs (0)
DISCUSSION

Brush-off


Rob,
I didn't say "computer envy" was the only link between the two bodies of work.
You might recall that up to that point in the discussion the frames for the discussion were "Boing Boing artist," "tiki bar kitsch" and "YBA hangover." I wanted to introduce at least another possible lineage for the work, and also introduce the idea that materiality, presence, and scale might alter our reading of it since we were all talking about jpegs.
I get the sense that you would be perfectly happy to only talk about jpegs as long as we could frame it in the good ol' Art & Language way of talking about things. And that's cool--knock yourself out.
I was being devil's advocate for the work, but I can't be an advocate.
Like Paddy and Ed and T.Whid (if I can presume to guess why he seconded Ed), I suspect that it's butt-awful in person. The jpegs are beyond stupid (too literal, obvious, etc)
In fairness to the painters I mentioned, many are doing important work and aren't just producing for their overlords. I am much closer to them than I am to you and would never say something as blinkered as "scale is unimportant."
Paddy, I will address your comments in another post (or comment).

DISCUSSION

Brush-off


That is, painters exhibiting in NY in the last decade...

DISCUSSION

Brush-off


Clarification of the clarification (a post on this may be necessary, with pictures): Manetas has made art with the computer, but the work he got known for, at Postmasters, was paintings of computer gear. NY painters referencing "the computer or computer imagery": Michael Zahn, Shirley Kaneda, Jeff Elrod, Torben Giehler, Carl Fudge...

DISCUSSION

Brush-off


A friend thinks I need to address this observation of Rob Myers':

>>Nesbitt's picture doesn't look photorealistic, it looks like the illustrations in children's books explaining IT of the time. It fits into the what was by then the established Pop strategy of depicting the physical and media products of capital as if they were high genre subjects (see Hamilton's "Hommage a Chrysler Corp"). I like Nesbitt's picture but it does not depict digital imagery, it depicts an expensive and new piece of computing machinery as seen in print media. So this is not an image that has any historical bearing on Proops's work, it is not an example of that genre, and it did not start that genre.

Response:

The painting is 205 x 205 cm (6.5 x 6.5 feet) so "children's book" is probably not the connotation that sprung to mind when the work was first seen hanging in show of "media products." Hard to say, we're talking about a jpeg, but yes, definitely Pop, which is where photorealism or hyperrealism came from.

As for whether a picture of a computer is "digital imagery," obviously it isn't and Rob is nitpicking--taking my term "computer envy" and creating his own frame for it: "To be a precedent for Dan Proops you must have had to do "pixelation" or imagery made with a computer to be envious of the computer."

My frame was Nesbitt, Manetas, Gonzales, Proop: painters who have a universe of possible subjects to paint: fruits, the home, attractive young people, war, landscapes, cityscapes, etc. but choose computers and their products and byproducts because they feel that is important subject matter.

I call it envy because they have not made the next logical leap, which is to walk away from the painting studio and make the art with the thing they are so interested in.

I hope this clarifies where I am coming from.


DISCUSSION

Brush-off


I meant vis a vis and not via in the next to last sentence.