To fully appreciate what’s going on here you have to begin with the post about Ellsworth Kelly that I posted here, and work forwards.

Using the same hardware paint sample squares, I’ve taken and covered some of the interior colors up with other squares, layering them in various ways.  The result produces rectangles of many shapes, strong contrasts between light and dark and/or warm and cool colors, and narrow vertical bands of color that play off against the bulkier more squarish shapes.  The final image is produced in a camera. I just arrange the squares and then unarrange them — which means that the great work of art thus produced is forever lost to those high-rolling collectors who might have desired to own them.  Que sera sera.  (I’ll be happy, of course, to reproduce any of these on commission.  The price for one of these better-than-Ellsworth-Kelly pieces is only 8 million dollars.  Quite a bargain.  That’s half what one pays for a Damien Hirst.)

Anyway, since the image exists chiefly in the camera’s digital memory and upon your computer screen, it means that it can be manipulated in one’s software.  I rotated the image until I found the orientation I liked best.  One could also reverse it, change the colors and jazz it up in lots of ways, playing to one’s heart’s content.

And I hope your heart is content.  However, I think your hands should have something useful to offer as well.  The next image will take us back into the mists of time to when people made things by hand.  Or back to memories of kindergarten.  Same thing.  Children are savages.  But they can teach us all the savage pleasures, such as crayoning and drawing for the pure joy of it.

So, next post.  The plot thickens.  Remember, we’re on a journey looking for “real art.”

9 thoughts on “Square Made More Complicated

  1. Perhaps we’ll end up at a definition of ‘real art’. I think there is a real nihilism at the heart of the kind of art you are objecting to. I hope ‘real art’ has something to do with asserting a possibility. It’s a most fascinating project and I’m enjoying it at lot.

  2. Tellement rapide, Aletha, ou moi tellement lente! Je voulais commenter sur le premier post mais le temps d’y penser un peu et voila 2 autres posts.
    Mais cela continue bien la dernière discussion sur l’existence de l’art.

    Ce n’est certainement pas “my cup of tea”, et je comprends un peu ce moyen qu’on les gens d’evaluer les pièces en disant” je pourrais le faire” ou “mais est-ce qu’il sait dessiner”.
    Cela me laisse quand même un peu songeuse car je ne pourrais pas faire ce qu’il fait, je suis fachée avec les lignes droites, et apres 2 carrés je devrais aller prendre l’air pour me réveiller.
    Je n’avais pas pensé a la solution des échantillons de peinture

  3. Bonjour Benedicte,

    apropos “je ne pourrais fas faire ce qu’il fait” — ce “il,” c’est Ellsworth Kelly? Pourquoi vous ne pouviez pas faire ces choses? Qu’on est faché en faisant les lignes droites — quels sorte de lignes sont ils? Je ne comprends pas.

    Alors, en verité, ne savoir faire dessiner, c’est une bonne chose. De chercher l’objet ou bien l’idée parmis les sensations de vivre, c’est le but de l’art. L’enchantement de l’art commence avec ce chemin: la curiosité. L’etat un peu songeuse (dreamy?) — c’est une merveilleuse commencement. Une commencement parfaite.

    Et peut-etre on cherche ce “commencement” chaque jour de la vie.


  4. oui, ce il, c’est Kelly. Je ne peux pas faire ces lignes droites et ces carrés parceque cela m’ennuie (it is boaring). C’est pourquoi je disais que je ne peux pas faire ce qu’il fait. Surtout la quantité qu’il a fait.

    Je suis fachée avec les lignes droites, c’est un peu comme une expression, c’est dire je n’aime pas les lignes droites, surtout tracées a la règle, c’est comme un dessin de géométrie.

    Cela me laisse un peu songeuse. Not dreamy,more in a state of reflexion, thinking, that, if people evaluate an artist by the technical difficulty of his painting (I am referring to the Missouri farmer), then I would not have a chance in competing in the repetition of squares.

  5. Benedicte,
    Si vous trouvez M. Kelly ennuyeux, c’est si bon (which is also the name of the song I listened to today — “C’est si bon” joue au guitar par Bireli Lagrane). It is boring this art that has become simplified to the point of stupor. And that’s the quality that a farmer could see immediately. The farmer sees that the squares are just squares, like the tiles on the floor — though some tiles are very pretty. And in Islam tiles become a high art. Still the competition of squares is boring.

    But the complication of art, in itself, is not “it” either. Or if it is, what becomes of poor Matisse?! Leonardo is a great artist, but one tends to think less of Bouguereau — but perhaps that’s unfair? It is very complicated, is it not?

    But I’m using squares to get to art — or a form of art — even to get to things that are not squares. Kind of a “yellow brick road” — one road — to art and specifically for the Kelly crowd that visits my blog daily.

    Meanwhile here’s somebody else playing C’est si bon — this is a nice version too.


  6. je lis avec beaucoup d’interet le thriller des petits carrés et j’attends la suite.

    L’art, un sujet difficile et aussi délicat, car changeant, Bouguereau techniquement sans reproche, s’est retrouvé a la poubelle pendant longtemps et a retrouvé un certain succés. Is it fair? No, but fame is never fair I think.

    J’aime beaucoup Bireli Lagrene, autant dans le manouche que le jazz, et merci pour l’autre version de c’est si bon, plus sobre et bien aussi.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s