Megan and Her Plane

Megan Merrimen is a designer currently residing in Lafayette. This picture shows her holding her recently painted airplane. And if you can't tell the work is almost as beautiful as herself!

Un Hibou Français

I'm teaching French to pre schoolers this year. The theme is owls, so I thought why don't I do a painting of an owl for the classroom! And voila, this emerged:

Painting of a House

Alright, so I was commissioned by a friend to do a painting of her daughters' childhood home. So here's the finished product!

Nude completed

Exercise in Figure Painting

Dave's Commission Completed!

Finally another update with the Mickey Shunick Painting!

I forgot to preface that the painting behind me is the portrait of Mickey. Anyways, I've decided to call it a done work and will be giving it to the Shunick Family in the near future.

Update's on Dave's Dino of Destruction

It's almost finished! Any critiques or suggestions (as long as they are done in a positive manner) are definitely welcome. Thanks again for tuning in and supporting me in my artistic endeavors. 

Update on Dave's Commission!

So I've added the leaning tower of pisa crumbling to bits and a volcano in the background! Now it's time to do some tweaking on the piece! 

Video Updates on Dave's Painting

Today's Update! Dave's Commission!

Commission for Dave

Hey everyone! I've posted a video describing my next project! If you would like to give me any feedback go ahead and leave me a comment. I'm open to all ideas and suggestions as long as they are constructive. :) Thanks! 

Starting a Project for Richard

Okay, so I have a friend who has asked me to do a series of him bowling. I started working on it today, and realized something. I am really rusty with non-acrylic material. I don't think I've struggled so much with a piece since I was in high school. Anyways, here's what I managed to create. It is not the final product, but rather some rough sketches to get me to where I need to be.

If you couldn't tell, the last piece is done in acrylic and is way better than the two above it. Anyways, it's time for a break. 

More Updates on the Portrait of Mickey

So I've decided to take a break from the painting. I can't seem to get it how I want it and if I keep working on it, the piece will not be as successful as I'd like it to be. So for now, I've placed this project on hold. It's time to do something new, so that when I return, I will have a renewed sense of how to go about the portrait.

Portrait Update

Progress

It looks a little creepy right now, but once I'm done it'll look better. Also need to work on proportions...

Starting Mickey's Portrait

Ashley Austin: Problem Solving Her Way Through The Arts

Figure 1: Dragonfly 

I interviewed Ashley Austin, a former peer of mine and now a prospering designer. The thing is, I've always been a fan of her work and felt it only appropriate to feature her in my blog.

Graduating from ULL in Graphic Design, Austin is currently working at Channel One Digital Inc. Her job entails her to design for the people rather than for herself. Meaning, "In the realm of graphic design, [her] audience is everything to [her]" (Austin). Yet, she mentions that there is this visceral strife between the visual stimulation and the outcome of her creations. In other words, she can only do so much to influence her target audience, the rest is left up to fate.

"It's rough sometimes to be on the visual end of things. It feels like being a cheerleader. You get the crowd on your side, but the football team still needs to win the game. It's all kind of out of your control" (Austin). 

She goes on to describe how graphic design needs an intangible, yet concrete solution whereas visual art celebrates the notion of uncertainty. Hence, why she needs the fine arts to escape her fulfilling, yet exhausting career. Figure 1, does a great job demonstrating her need to immerse herself in the instability of her inherent reality.

A dragonfly by nature seems to be a bilateral creature; it's appendages symmetrically distributed. Yet this is an illusion, which figure 1 focuses on. By definition a dragonfly is an insect whose names derive from the Greek words: anisos, meaning uneven and pteros meaning wings. Note the word "uneven." What is so fascinating about this definition is that whether Austin intended to or not, she has recreated a visual metaphor for her cheerleading metaphor. No matter how balanced things may seem, there is always an the inevitable wild card; the independent variable tipping the scale just a bit. And perhaps this is why she has chosen such violent colors to depict this four-winged insect.

The reds and yellows embrace a certain tension within the piece. It is serves as a constant reiteration of the precarious nature we revolve around. The yellow and white brush strokes on the right side of the piece are diagonally zigzagging out, while the red flows straight down. This dichotomy between colors and lines support the subjects role in the piece.

What can be surmised about Ashley Austin, is that she is an artist striving to bring to light the Yin and Yang of life. The fight within ourselves to create a balance. It is a problem to be solved and her work exemplifies the nature of critical thinking.

TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT ASHLEY AUSTIN, FOLLOW HER ON TWITTER: https://twitter.com/#!/kohshkah

The Famous Zombies of Ben Brown

Figure 1

Based in Sydney, Australia, illustrator, Ben Brown, has taken the pop culture zombie craze and inserted it into the iconic figures of mainstream society.  From Bob Marley to Spiderman, these skeletal sketches create a visual dichotomy between idol and monster which can be seen in Figure 1. 

Figure 1 shows a divide between Bob Marley the rasta, singing activist and Bob Marley the flesh-eating zombie. His eyes alone support this claim. If the readers were to compare the two sides,  they would notice that his pop culture persona, listlessly stares out, but not at the viewer, while his man-eating counter part casts an illusion of ogling its potential prey.  However, zombie Marley doesn't exactly have any soft human tissue to counteract its monstrous nature. His skeletal structure makes him seem so cannibalistic, in that the viewer can see his teeth  forming a forced smile across one half of his face. What can be surmised is that this monochromatic composition manifests an idea of a paranormal celebration. It allows the different tones of reds, browns, blacks and muted yellows to interact not only with each other, but also across the piece. 

Notice how the lighter hues pop out from figure 1. The effect of this creates a staccato-esque rhythm. The piece is cohesive, but I would not describe it as fluid. The movement is based on the colorful notes struck across the canvas. The vibrant reds are a fantastic example of this, as well as the darker tones, which create shadows and also an emphasis of the structure of Marley's coat. Although, the coat seems to be translucent. On the left side (the viewer's right), his bones are completely visible. However, on the right side (the viewer's left) the coat is more opaque. However, it still embodies some characteristics of its lucid brother. A small portion of the clavicle and most of the ribs can be seen. This has given the figure a sense of decay, while the colors scream life. 

Even his use of lines rebel against the nature of each other. On his right side there is only, for lack of a better term, a swiggle. On his left he looks almost devine as the lines radiate away from his body and then resurface at the two corners as wave like circles, which even dare to enter into him (near his pelvic bone). It truly is a paradox of a piece. And all and all, figure 1 reads as a prevailing display of yin and yang. 

So what is my opinion of Brown, as an artist?

On a scale of 1-10 (1 being unspeakably horrible and 10 being I would sell my soul for such talent), I would rate Mr. Brown as a 7.6. The man clearly has skill and really has perfected his craft. What keeps him from being any higher is my personal taste. Although, I dig this style of art I'm always much more partial to something a bit more honest. With his work you can't really get a sense of who he is, just what his product is. Now don't get me wrong. This is in no way a bad thing. It just means he is successful in commercial art, which probably makes him an exception to the starving artist stereotype. 

To read more on Ben Brown click this link: HEREEEE

So many reasons why I wish I owned a real camera...

It's almost there. I know I have a few more things to tweak, but I think I've captured my general idea within this draft. 

I'll write more later. As for now, I am wiped out and am ready for some quality time with my pillow. 

Progress...

Yet Again, MORE PROGRESS...

Using the actual definition of the word "sex" I have created a background that describes what the image could be proposing. However, the dynamics of it are as fragile as the hospitality described by Jacques Derrida. There is always a thin line between love and power. The idea of having the word "sold" placed across the figures "mouth" complements my idea. 

Evolving Still

The bottom left corner, one can see The Agony and the Ecstasy of St. Theresa by Gianlorenzo Bernini, Renaissance sculpter. It depicts a cherub penetrating the saint with an arrow, alluding to a more sexual connotation. In using it as part of my pastiche of words and images it reiterates the prowess of sexuality in society throughout history.

Gianlorenzo Bernini's Sculpture

Further recording of the Formation of This Piece

Music: TV on the Radio: Staring at the Sun 

Progression Continued...

Progress of the Piece

Okay, so it seems this piece is evolving into a reaction to the way sex is viewed as a commodity. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing. Rather, I'm hoping for this to be viewed as a neutral reality that has existed since the dawn of man and woman. The goal is to achieve a visual display describing hospitality in an erotic and sexual manner, while maintaining an absence of vulgarity. 

The Start of a New Piece

Today, I decided to begin a painting centering around the idea of Derridian "hospitality." This 30" by 40" mass of redness seems to lack direction. Perhaps this could be attributed to the technique I've chosen. Using my hands as a brush, I was hoping to let the paint inspire the formation of this work. Unfortunately,  I'm still a bit clueless. Every idea I seem to have doesn't properly fit my mood and it's hard for me to  construct an image when I'm not satisfied with my concept.

So what did I initially invision this project to be?

Using the words, which describe hospitality, I wanted to make an image of God and Adam's fingers touching to imply the unstable balance humanity has with an ever-forsaking deity as it relates to the concept of hospitality. Then, I realized that it would be pointless to do so because I have no personal qualms with this relationship and it does not bring about an honest depiction of who I am as an artist. 

Now where does that leave me?

I am here asking you, the reader, to advise me on which path this piece should follow. Should it be a struggle between itself? Or with an outside force? Or a bit of both? 

Voina: Performative, Political Penetration. Is it Art?

Philosophy graduate from Moscow State University, Oleg Vorotnikov and  his wife Natalia Sovok have started up a political "art" activist group called Voina. From flipping cop cars to displaying a giant penis on a St. Petersburg drawbridge, the group is really stirring things up in Russia. And for better or worse, it is gaining them international recognition. However, the question remains, should this be considered art? And if it is, what separates their 213 foot phallus from every other penis scribbled on the backs of bathroom stalls and subways?   

Figure 1

According to John Williams Narins, an ARTnews journalist, "In April, the group received the Innovation Prize, one of [Russia's] two major art honors" (1) . I wouldn't exactly call their work innovative, but it does cause the viewer to reflect on Voina's political statement. In regards to figure 1, the giant penis faces the FSB headquarters, once known as the KGB. For those readers familiar with the hit show, Archer, you know exactly what an insult this places on the Russian  government, or rather it's policing system. In other words, the two are screaming to the whole of Russia (and now the world), what they believe, is severe corruption within FSB. Ergo, it is not surprising that Vorotnikov and Sovok have been arrested and are awaiting a hearing. If convicted, the two face the daunting possibility of being locked up for close to 7 years.

In a show of support, renowned graffati artist, Banksy, has graciously offered to donate, "all proceeds from the sale of a new run of 175 prints to the jailed duo and their group" (The Art Exchange). At £450 per print, Banksy certainly is making a statement that goes beyond philanthropy. As a political activist himself, it would appear he has embraced Voina's message with the arms of a comrade. And in financially supporting them, he has involved himself in their performance. 

Now, it's all well and good standing up and in Banksy case, encouraging what Voina feels is nepotism, but in calling their work art, in my opinion is a bit extreme. Then again, so is their statement. 

"Illegality is an inescapable element of Voina’s art. The reason human-rights groups have paid little attention to their legal plight until recently is probably that what Voina does is generally subject to criminal sanctions, whether you consider it art or not" (Narins 1). 

So is this what separates Voina's massive member from the rest of its phallic brethren?  In engaging in illegal activity, Voina's art makes the statement:  Size Matters. (Not just literally, but figuratively as well). If I were to claim that their performance  deserves artistic merit, then I would have to inadvertently agree with their provocations. However, I neither condone nor condemn it.  Rather, I see Voina's activism as  just another dick causing an uproar with its direct and rather erect, political adversity.

Figure 2: One of Banksy's Political Artworks

Postmodern Artifact

JOSEPH KOSUTH: A CONCEPTUAL ARTIST OF THE POSTMODERN ERA

(Scroll to the Bottom to See Figures 1-3)

By: Kali Babineaux

PREFACE: AN EMERGING ARTIST

Think of postmodernism as a game that affects every facet of the general populace. While it always existed in society and has been whispered about in art circles since the mid 1960s, postmodernism wasn’t recognized by the mainstream until the moment the American dollar went off the gold system in 1971. As a result, the rules of economics changed, making it obligatory for American citizens to keep the dollar circulating. Basically what this means is: there needs to be a continuum of buying and of selling goods to prevent the system from crashing. If everything stops, the game’s over and everyone loses, leaving the fiscal value of the dollar meaningless. Without gold, the dollar is no longer rooted in any substantial value. The inherent postmodern nature of the dollar brings arbitrariness to communication. Much like a domino effect it relies on surrounding events to map out its synthetic purpose. Some people embrace this reactionary pandemonium, and some people resent it. Joseph Kosuth simply simulates it. In creating a vision of postmodernism, Kosuth not only invites skepticism of traditional communication models, but throughout his body of work, he captures the essence of the philosophies associated with postmodernism.

Joseph Kosuth is a conceptual artist known for his textual installations. Born in 1945, he was raised in Toledo, Ohio. Between 1955 and 1962, he attended the Toledo Museum School of Design. During this period, he also studied exclusively with a Belgian painter, Line Bloom Draper. In 1963 he enrolled at the Cleveland  Art Institute, but a year later he found himself studying in Paris and traveling throughout Europe and North Africa. In 1965 he made his way back to the United States, where he decided to enroll at the School of Visual Arts in New York. Finally, in 1967, Kosuth paused his 12-year-long, academic escapade and started promoting himself as an artist. Influenced by Ludwig Wittgenstein, Kosuth’s work can be seen as an embodiment of the advanced concepts of communicative linguistics.

Wittgenstein was an Austrian/British philosopher who’s Theory of Representation, despite reflecting a few similarities of Ferdinand de Saussure’s linguistic ideologies, acts as a stepping-stone between modern and postmodern philosophy. According to Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophilus, “Nothing is intrinsically representational; status as representational is relative to symbol systems” (Carney). Essentially, what he means is that a graphic phoneme whether it is a picture or a letter is not naturally encoded into our genes, and its perceived identity is dependent on its external environment. Ferdinand de Saussure, on the other hand, wrote, “…although writing is in itself not part of the internal system of language, it is impossible to ignore this way in which the language is constantly represented” (Saussure 25). Although both have referred to the graphic phoneme as being a separate entity from the referent, Saussure creates an illusion of a naturally embedded caste system between speech and writing. He fervently argued that the relationship between speech and writing could be drawn up mathematically. He even invented an equation to demonstrate his theory where a signified, or concept, is seen as a denominator and the signifier, or sound pattern, is seen as the numerator to equate to the formation of a sign. However, he claims that the relationship between the signified and the signifier is arbitrary, and in admitting this, he creates a contradiction within his linguistic theory. If the function between the two variables, the signified and signifier, have no definable significance, then Saussure places the signifier in the same category as the sign, thereby creating universal equality to each constant in his equation.

Wittgenstein, however, overlooks the role of the oral phoneme. His omission implies that there is a huge distinction between how the linguistic theories of the two can be interpreted. That is to say, where Saussure damns the graphic phoneme, Wittgenstein sentences it to a linguistic purgatory: neither adhering to the prescriptivist structure nor a descriptivist manifestation. The idea of the written resting in limbo, has given Joseph Kosuth a form of iconoclastic inspiration.  His works denature the traditional values placed on language, which encompass the heart of Derridian philosophy and Wittgensteinian theocracy.

PART 1: KOSUTH’S TAUTOLOGY COLLECTION

Jacques Derrida once wrote, in his Signature, Event, Context, there are certain prerequisites to context. A word or phrase must be ubiquitously accepted and, “a rending necessary of a certain generalization and a certain displacement of the concept of writing” must come into effect.  Essentially, a word or a phrase, whether voiced or scripted, can be shifted out of its original context and be placed in a new context. However, the transferred word or phrase, in order to be a relevant communicator, must still be readable despite diverging from the original context (Derrida 310).  What is so significant about this assessment is that it supports evidence that language is anything but stagnant. It is evolving, changing, and adapting to what best fits a particular situation. Those meanings that cannot successfully be relayed, are no longer in the running for the survival of the understood.

Much like Derrida, Joseph Kosuth demonstrates the relativity of context in his piece One in Three Chairs (seen in figure 1), which debuted in 1965. The significance of this piece is that it is a member of Kosuth’s Photo/Object/Lemma series and is a subcategory of his Tautology Collection. Lemma is a term or phrase alluded to in a glossary, and tautology is a repetition of a single idea presented in several different ways until it either breaks from the referent or remains in a cycle that leads it back to the original concept. Imagine the latter concept as being similar to the dynamics of the hit TV show Wheel of Fortune. When players spin the wheel and land on “bankrupt” Patt Sajak informs the participants that they have lost all their money and must continue where they started off; meaning, they have gone from possibly $700 to $0. In this scenario the tautology is the participant spinning the wheel. It will continue to spin the wheel until it earns back the lost context, then exceed the original meaning, or land on the bankrupt flag and once more, lose comprehension. The impact of these arbitrary units reinforces Kosuth’s artistic expression:

“Works of art are analytic propositions. That is, viewed within their context – as art – they that it is a presentation of the artist's intention, that is, he is saying that that particular work of art is art, which means, is a definition of art. Thus, that it is art is true a priori (which is what Judd means when he states that "if someone calls it art, it's art")” (Kosuth 134).

Art alone has no meaning. Rather it must be given meaning, which reinforces Wittgenstein’s Theory of Representation, as well as the Derridian philosophy of shifting context. Despite initially intending to depict meaninglessness, Kosuth created an unavoidable paradox within his artistic process. Specifically, the interactions of design elements in his artwork interfere with the goals of his conceptual art.

Design by nature is emblematic of modernism in that it organizes disparate parts and forms them together to create a coherent whole. Kosuth’s conceptions, in regards to this particular definition, act as its inverse. Even though Kosuth intended to compose without meaning, the act of composing with a purpose creates meaning, hence the basic conundrum of postmodernism. Moreover, in claiming, “The how you make a work is far less important than the why you make a work” Kosuth overlooks the function of his sophisticated and well-planned layout in figure 1. A strategic use of repetition, form, color and movement occurs in Kosuth’s One in Three Chairs.

In figure 1, the repetitive geometric sequence of rectangular forms and the monochromic dulled colors depict the photo, the object, and the lemma as having a fluid continuity. This can be seen in not only the framing, but also in the chair’s literal construction as well. In other words, figure 1 shows a composition of blocks of wood that create a chair in both the photo and object. The lemma, on the contrary, uses a different medium. The text, seen on this image, create six lines. When viewed collectively with the object and the photo, they take on a rectangular form. This causes the rectangle to serve as a marker, or a reminder, for the concept’s physical nature. Nevertheless the metaphysical emerges when Kosuth’s use of color, or lack of color, is examined; allowing the impotent white background to introduce the mood of the piece. What is inevitably derived from figure 1 is the creation of a sterile and emotionless atmosphere. No doubt, the unremarkable shade of brown, chosen to cover the object was meant to allude to an idea of subtle apathy, while the lack of depth found in the black and white photo resonate indifference That is to say: In wanting to embrace blandness, the piece seeks to emphasize the meaninglessness of the chair.

Despite its monotonous and flat presence, the chair has unexpectedly invited intrigue. Perhaps, this can be attributed to the way it is showcased. In placing the object below the photo and the lemma, Kosuth inadvertently evokes a sense of favoritism to a hierarchical structure. Although conceptually this tautology is to be considered paratactic (Neilson) since each facet is equally comparable, the physical placement causes its visual grammar to be read in a hypertaxis (Neilson) manner. Meaning both the lemma and the chair can be seen as dependent clauses clinging to the object.

Regardless, figure 1’s visual anomaly is in no way indicative of modernism. It merely prescribes to a few physical attributes to modernistic analysis, which are greatly over shadowed by Kosuth’s artistic concept. In other words, figure 1 highlights postmodernism’s ability to administer incongruities in semantics. As a result, it is challenging the existential notion of presence in a manner similar to Derrida, which can be seen in the following quotation:

“I would like to demonstrate that the recognizable traits of the classical and narrowly defined concept of writing are generalizable. They would be valid not only for all the orders of ‘signs’ and for all languages in general, but even beyond semiolinguistic communication, for the entire field of what philosophy would call experience, that is, the experience of Being: so called ‘presence’” (Derrida 316-317).

Derrida infers upon the inability to grasp a present context, because when it is grasped the moment has past and the context is no longer part of the present. This mirroring of the photo, object and lemma give a better understanding of how the incongruity of semantics acts as a constant.

PART 2: GUESTS AND FOREIGNERS: AN ARTISTIC AMPHORISM

Among the many pieces that make Kosuth’s Guests and Foreigners collection, “A Labyrinth in which I can Venture” (figure 2) serves as exemplary evidence of the rhizomatic occurrence in Gilles Deleuze’s and Félix Guattari’s A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. A rhizome, by definition, is a horizontal stem usually underground that sends out roots and shoots from its nodes. Analytically, it is a continuum of meaning that is constantly sprouting in a horizontal manner. When compared to Kosuth’s labyrinth, the many literal and metaphorical rhyzomatic forks either lead the wanderer to an exit or a dead-end. This figurative journey acts as a bombardment to the wanderer with over a 100 different philosophical texts entangled in a pastiche of neon, paint, and print. More over, Figure 2 orchestrates a visual example of postmodernism by incorporating the viewer into a jarring web of unassociated text and confusion.

Mathew L. McAlpin, writer of the online journal, The Brooklyn Rail, appropriately made an enigma out of his critique on Figure 2. Complementing and reproaching the features of the labyrinth, the end product of McAlpin’s article lends itself to the notion that Kosuth has created a pseudo-rhyzomatic structure.

“What once saw itself as a revolution has now become a framework. For an artist whose material is quotation, these wall-quotes from Theory’s canon add meaning on meaning, ornament on ornament like the gilded frame on a Fragonard[1]. More significantly, they create an intellectual setting, a selective historical context for Kosuth’s previous works from which new meanings can flow” (McAlpin 1)

It would appear McAlpin sees the maze as a building block for the way meaning is constructed. Nevertheless, it is still a facilitated experience. That is to say, the wanderers depart from a preconceived and constructed exit. McAlpin describes the figurative venture through Figure 2 by stating, “one could begin anywhere in a labyrinth, with any quote, and comprehend the entire show in terms of that particular quote” (1). This may be true, but the fact still remains that Kosuth has simulated this experience. His personal bias towards certain philosophical doctrine manipulates the environment of the labyrinth. McAlpin later makes note of this in his critique saying, “If you were to press this insight into the service of analysis, the resulting interpretation would virtually write itself (perhaps this is the reason for Kosuth’s immense popularity in the academy, where his art has become, in his own words, ‘dissertation fodder).’ Behind the curtain would stand Kosuth, authoring the interpretation by turning the interpreter into his mouthpiece, his ventriloquist’s dummy” (1). McAlpin inadvertently creates a set up to how Deleuze and Guattari relate their theory of deterritorialization and reterritorialization to the rhyzome.

Deterritorialization and reterritorialization are key to understanding the role of guests and foreigners in figure 2. So, before liaisons can be formed between these two terms and Kosuth’s Labyrinth, an understanding of deterritorialixation and reterritorialization is necessary. Deleuze and Guattari demonstrate the way the two function by giving their readers a situational example. The one they have chosen depicts the interactions between a wasp and an orchid. The goal of the orchid is to get the wasp to spread its pollen, so that it can sustain the survival of its species, and the goal of the wasp is to use the pollen as nourishment. However, the wasp must first become attracted to the orchid, and to do this “the orchid deterritorializes by forming an image, tracing of a wasp; [this in turn causes] the wasp [to] reterritorialize on that image” (Deleuze, Guattari 10). In regards to how this relates to figure 2, McAlpin refers to Kosuth as a ventriloquist and those entering the labyrinth as his dummy. The Labyrinth, much like the orchid must attract wanders. If not, Kosuth’s vision would be unable to thrive and eventually, its meaning would die. What can be surmised from this observation is that Joseph Kosuth has made Deleuze and Guattari’s deterritorialization and reterritorialization an omnipresent facet in figure 2. The effects of these two ubiquitous occurrences emphasize the instability of the status of a guest and a foreigner upon entry into the labyrinth.           

To best explain the ever-shifting classifiers, which distinguish between a guest and foreigner, one must look to Jacques Derrida’s Hospitality. Hospitality is a key component to history, to the law, politics, and to economics, and although it is indefinable, it can be described. Think of it as tautological. That is to say, hospitality has no meaning except for what people place on the examples, which simulate it. Therefore, Derrida gives his readers several examples of hospitality, and among the many given; it only seemed appropriate to start off with the etymology of the word. After all, to understand its present and future function, a dissection of its past must be studied. According to Derrida, hospitality derives from the Latin word for “hostile,” which already gives the reader a clue to its precarious nature. Now in relation to figure 2, the role of a guest and a foreigner seems to mimic the capricious atmosphere hospitality lends itself to. That is to say, Kosuth wants to reiterate the impossibility of remaining in a stagnant classification of either a guest or a foreigner, and the qualities, which distinguish between the two titles, although abiding by the same general rules are differentiated between relative cultural differences.

The general distinguishing factor between a guest and a foreigner relates to how strange the person is to the host. A guest, most often, is seen less as a stranger and more as a friend. A foreigner, on the other hand, signifies uncertainty from the host, meaning the person is an alien to the host’s culture. However, the foreigner can become a guest when diplomacy between different countries is exchanged. To best explain this, Derrida quotes Kant, in that hospitality is a cosmopolitan right, which  adheres to “…the space of right, not of morality and politics or anything else but of a right determined in its relationship to citizenship, the state, even if it is a world state” (Derrida 3). What Derrida has done, is create an impersonal relationship, which treats all guests as foreigners under the guise of hospitality. This then makes a guest and a foreigner indistinguishable, which creates a desensitized environment.

However, this desensitization does not always apply to every occasion where hospitality takes place. Derrida introduces the law of inversion, which if not administered has the potential to create hostility between the two people engaging in the practice of hospitality. In a successful reciprocation of hospitality, “the master of this house, the master in his own home, the host, can only accomplish this task as host, that is hospitality, in becoming invited by the other into his home, in being welcomed by him whom he welcomes in receiving the hospitality he gives” (Derrida 9). The danger in this exchange can result in an unwanted return of hospitality by the former guest. This in turn can cause insult to the former host resulting in a hostile relationship between the two.  What this hypothetical situation amounts to, is a miscommunication between guest and host. However, in figure 2, the role of inversion does not present itself between host (Kosuth’s Labyrinth) and guest (audience). Rather it is between the guest and the foreigner, which makes them continuously subservient to its host.

The conclusions from the previous analysis can be compared to an avid spectator of WC wrestling finding out his favorite sport is fake. This dispelling reality  disillusions the rebellious façade of figure 2 and weakens the effect of its greeting; an excerpt from one of Michel Foucault philosophical texts regarding the evolving self and its relationship to the state. In examining the second half of the meant to be subversive bienvenue, the guest and the foreigner are confronted by Foucault’s terse truth.

“…What, do you imagine that I would take so much trouble and so much pleasure in writing, do you think that would keep so persistently to my task, if I were not preparing- with a rather shaky hand- a labyrinth into which I can venture, in which I can move my discourse, opening up underground passages, forcing it to go far from itself, finding overhangs that reduce and deform its itinerary, in which I can lose myself and appear at last to eyes that I will never have to meet again. I am no doubt not the only one who writes in order to have no face. Do not ask who I am and do not ask me to remain the same: leave it to our bureaucrats and our police to see that our papers are in order. At least spare us their morality when we write.”

What this passage provides is an understanding, not a definition to figure 2’s signified title (A Labyrinth in which I can Venture). The identity of the piece implies the pervading morphology of this self-made maze, which wants to remain anonymous while it castrates morality from state legislature, claiming the relativity is the determinate of ethics, not the stagnant drawn-up line of good or bad.

As a whole, A Labyrinth in which I can Venture can be seen as a modern day replication of the biblical tower of babble; forcing its wanderers on a daunting journey of deciphering and sifting through an unexpected rush of anarchical context. The results of this simulated venture can only be described as disorienting. And when compared to Deleuze, Guattari, Derrida, and Foucault, the subservient and iconoclastic inferences no longer represent the reality of the labyrinth. In other words, Joseph Kosuth is the puppeteer pulling the strings of the interpreting guests and foreigners as they internalize and process the meanings and contexts of their surrounding environment.

PART 3: THE CLOSING OF AN UNFINISHED PIECE

Now that pieces from both Joseph Kosuth Tautology Collection and Guests and Foreigners Collection have been thoroughly analyzed, the reader can see the overall effect of Kosuth’s artistic process. However, before this is done lets take a quick recap of how each theorist discussed influenced Kosuth. Starting from the beginning, the reader can deduce that Ferdinand de Saussure’s linguistic theory served as an example of what Kosuth hoped he successfully challenge. As for Ludwig Wittgenstein, he set up a great foundation to understanding the evolution of Kosuth’s complete collection. Jeffery Nealson, although briefly mentioned, helped articulate the paratactic tendencies of his work and the potential hypotaxis contradictions within his collection. Jacques Derrida, of course, helped emphasize the shifting of context and how ambiguity functions in prescribing status, which heavily supports the theory of deterritorialization and reterritorialization of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s. Also in analyzing Derrida’s Hospitality, a great set-up emerges, allowing a fluid explanation of the Michel Foucault quotation at the entrance of figure 2. The result has led to the conclusion that Joseph Kosuth’s body of work is indeed a by-product of postmodernism, which allows One in Three Chairs and A Labyrinth in which I Venture to create a metaphorical hall of mirrors. This in turn, challenges viewers to embark on a journey that goes against the currents of traditional art and ideologies. However, it would be incorrect to claim that Joseph Kosuth’s works are completely void of these traditional practices. As previously examined, each work still abides by the governing authority of the principles and the elements of design. Nevertheless, that does not disqualify his work from being identified as postmodern. This is because every postmodern artifact is an example of the movement. Furthermore, in serving as an example, Joseph Kosuth’s conceptual art finds itself being systematically classified in a modernistic fashion, which inevitably reveals the paradoxical nature of the age of postmodernity.

---

[1] See figure 3 for a reference

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Brooklyn Rail: http://brooklynrail.org/2006/11/artseen/a-labyrinth-kosuth

Carney, James D. "Wittgenstein's Theory of Picture Representation." The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 40.20 (1981): 179-85. JSTOR. Web. 10 Apr. 2012. <http://www.jstor.org.libezp.lib.lsu.edu/stable/430409?seq=1&Search=yes&searchText=picture&searchText=representation&searchText=theory&searchText=wittenstein%27s&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasic>.

Deleuze, Gilles. Guattari Félix. “A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia”Postmodern Rhetorics. Ed. Brooke Rollins, PhD. Baton Rouge: Co Op Bookstore, 2012.

Derrida, Jacques. “Hospitality” Angelaki: Journal of the Theoretical Humanties vol. 5 issue 3 Dec. 2000

Derrida, Jacques. “Signature Event Context.” Postmodern Rhetorics. Ed. Brooke Rollins, PhD. Baton Rouge: Co Op Bookstore, 2012.

http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/collections/collection-online/show-full/bio/?artist_name=Joseph%20Kosuth

Jameson, Frederic. “The Cultural Logic of Later Capitalism.” Postmodern Rhetorics. Ed.

Nealon, Jeffrey T. “Alterity Politics: Ethics and Performance Subjectivity” Postmodern Rhetorics. Ed. Brooke Rollins, PhD. Baton Rouge: Co Op Bookstore, 2012.

http://radicalart.info/concept/tautology/kosuth/index.html

http://www.skny.com/artists/joseph-kosuth/images/

Saussure, Ferdinand. Course in General Linguistics. Chicago: Open Court, n.d. Print.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Fragonard_-_swing.jpg/220px-Fragonard_-_swing.jpg

Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoD5au1UCdI

Festival International

This weekend was Festival International. Needless to say, I made sure I was there. Although, I worked Friday and Sunday of the festival, I had Saturday off to check out what was going on. So here's what I did:

My brother and I hit up the scene around noonish. Our first stop was at the drink tent where Jake (my brother) bought a beer and I chose something a bit more festive, a spiked juice with Bacardi and Malibu appropriately entitled "Festival Juice." The fruity goodness that was my drink tasted as if it came from Bacchus's own Rhytas! And after a cup or two, I was feeling buzzed, which meant it was time to check out the bands and start dancing!

Of the many groups we saw that Saturday two bands particularly stood out. Radio Radio and Ceux Qui Marchent Debout. Radio Radio is a Canadian French Rap group that had me crowd surfing by the end of the night and Ceux Qui Marchent Debout are a french funk band that really tore up the stage. I mean, they ended the show leaving the stage and playing in the middle of the audience! I actually got to shake their hands and take pictures of them playing! Words cannot express how cool it was to be that close to the music!

Click Below to Check Out the Bands on YouTube: 

Radio Radio: Jacuzzi 


Ceux Qui Marchent Debout

Here are a view more photos from the Festival:

I still can't believe I got to see all these bands for free! This festival really brings in some great artists and is full of rich lively culture! So GG (good game) Festival International 2012! You really kept up the tradition of being beyond spectacular!