LUSI REVIEWS READ IT AND WEEP

We were all having such a hard time saying goodbye to Christian Rogers' Read It and Weep, that Lusi, our intern from Lewis & Clark, wrote a short review of it. Thank you, Lusi!

"Shock factor can be presented in a multitude of ways, in terms of color, form, style, and text, and in his most recent work Read It and Weep, Christian Rogers uses those qualities to fully encapsulate that feeling. It is easy to find oneself treading the fine line between identity and visibility, both within the self and the other, particularly as an artist. That notion comes to the foreground when a work becomes inherently grounded with a personal mark, a gesture, or your identity as an individual and an artist. Rogers harnesses this in-between ground to create jarring and evocative pieces that challenge not only his own convictions, but those of his audience as well.

Considering the current societal and artistic state of hyper mediation and disinterest with personalization, Rogers’ choice to paint his works on ephemera, the fleeting, rosy pages of The Financial Times is astute. The choice of medium grounds the work with a specificity of time and place, making it easily accessible, much like the accessibility and abundance of newspapers everywhere. With his shift from a more formalist and abstract style, to this current figurative and narrative style, Rogers also creates deeply meaningful and intimate works.

Tabletop Offering, 2016, monotype, silkscreen, and acrylic on newsprint, 26 x 22.5”

Tabletop Offering, 2016, monotype, silkscreen, and acrylic on newsprint, 26 x 22.5”

The perspective in these pieces is rich, both in a literal sense—such as in Avocado Offering where the foreground is drastically shifted in relation to the background—but also in a more symbolic manner. It is the responsibility of the artist to create the art, and the responsibility of the audience to take it in, and it all boils down to a matter of how a piece is approached. It is interesting to relate something so metaphorical as perspective (think: your lens as an audience/artist/human being) to something so visceral as sight. Yet, it would be difficult to function without either, and Rogers, aware of this dichotomy, creates images that pack a punch: attractive, memorable, and connected with universal sentiments.  

His work is more personal than universal in this particular series, yet it is still capable to subtly address little tid-bits of pop culture and current news, particularly considering the queer medium (read: the unconventional material and the non-heteronormative subject matter.) Even his smaller black and white collages offer a tasteful yet scandalous romp through the inner workings of Rogers’ creative process. And despite their absence of color and more apparent use of a mixed media technique, the pieces are equally bold.

Untitled II, 2016, Xerox and ink on paper, 9 x 12”

Untitled II, 2016, Xerox and ink on paper, 9 x 12”

Much like the offerings of fruit and other objects in some of Rogers’ pieces, this series is an eager offering to his audience—Read It and Weep is sexy, it’s unconventional, and it’s a hit."
—Lusi Lukova

Kyle, 2016, monotype, silkscreen, and acrylic on newsprint, 26 x 22.5”

Kyle, 2016, monotype, silkscreen, and acrylic on newsprint, 26 x 22.5”

AMANDA LEIGH EVANS AT PROJECT 387

Photograph courtesy of Project 387

Photograph courtesy of Project 387

Amanda Leigh Evans, who will be showing at Nationale at the end of this month with Anastasia Greer, is headed to Project 387, an art and community-focused residency program in beautiful Mendocino County, California. Take a look at this interview with Amanda on Project 387's blog to learn about what's on her mind as she begins her residency (she also gives some great book recommendations!). 

INTERVIEW: CHRISTIAN ROGERS

We had a chance to catch up with Christian Rogers about his new work now on view in Read It and Weep. Thanks to Christian for his honesty and humor!  

Christian Rogers // Read It and Weep on view at Nationale through July 25, 2016

Christian Rogers // Read It and Weep on view at Nationale through July 25, 2016

Gabi Lewton-Leopold: Can you talk about your move from abstract collage to this current, figurative series? 

Christian Rogers: My shift from abstract to figurative was a result of about a year of reflecting on what I was "really trying to express" versus something much less obscured or hidden by abstract gestures. I've always made work about men and my interactions with them but they were heavily distorted and deconstructed to the point they were no longer recognizable. I've realized that I was more concerned with formalist ideas at the time and I needed to find ways of making the content more visible. So naturally, bringing the subjects to the foreground solved some of my issues. I'm still trying to find that in-between ground. 

GLL: Do you feel like the "abstracted gestures" of past work served as a protection of sorts? And with these more narrative pieces, they are freer but at the same time more vulnerable? 

CR: Oh totally! When looking back I realize I was using abstracted forms in an attempt to avoid talking about what I really wanted to make work about. At the time I thought I was using them as a way of luring people into the painting before telling them what it was about. Since then, I feel much more open about who I am and am more connected to my subjects. I'm still trying to work through a lot of these topics. Like, how personal do I make it? How literal do I make it? Is a title enough? 

To Know Him Is to Love Him, 2016, monotype and acrylic on newsprint, 22.5 x 26"

To Know Him Is to Love Him, 2016, monotype and acrylic on newsprint, 22.5 x 26"

GLL: You mentioned before that you took a break from painting to focus on drawing before making this series. What brought that on and how did it influence this new work?

CR: I took a break from painting because I found myself putting the cart before the horse, which often resulted in a lot of stress and anxiety about painting. So, for a semester I chose to only draw and limit my materials. Not having to worry about materials or cost or "what if I fuck this giant painting up" was a relief. I could make lots of mistakes and not worry. Drawing also allowed me to be fast and free. The small drawings in the show are the most playful and least fussy. Some of them are my favorite. I also incorporated some collage elements into them. They serve like writing prompts for starting a drawing. I've most recently started taking the drawings and silkscreening parts of them to start a painting, like in Kyle for instance. I'm playing more with building the casual drawings into the paintings. We will see where it goes. 

Untitled VI, xerox and ink on paper, 12 x 9"

Untitled VI, xerox and ink on paper, 12 x 9"

Kyle, 2016, monotype, silkscreen, and acrylic on newsprint, 26 x 22.5"

Kyle, 2016, monotype, silkscreen, and acrylic on newsprint, 26 x 22.5"

GLL: Can you speak about your first experience working with the Financial Times as your medium? What intrigues you about that specific publication and how it responds to your work both in subject matter and formally? 

CR: I first used the Financial Times a few years back. I found a couple of issues in Portland. They no longer distribute to Portland for some reason. I was using it as a surface to make abstract drawings using oil stick. Besides the pale pink color, I liked how as a material it inherently had tangible information that could ground whatever I created in a specific place and time. Since I was making abstract work at the time, I liked how it anchored my marks in specific time. When looking at a drawing, you were also looking at the events of a specific day. I could know when something was made within a week of its creation. Now when I use it, I still like thinking about how there are countless, sometimes world altering, events happening parallel to me making my work. It's a humbling thought. There is also a serendipitous quality to working on the Financial Times. In Slip It to Me you can see the title of the piece appears as part of an ad. It's a little sexy and a little vulgar. I like it.  

Slip It to Me, 2016, monotype and acrylic on newsprint, 26 x 22.5"

Slip It to Me, 2016, monotype and acrylic on newsprint, 26 x 22.5"

GLL: Yes, I love that "slip it to me" moment! Because of how you incorporate the newspaper, you are able to appropriate the language and visuals of pop culture and current issues in a way that feels, as you put it, "serendipitous" and not forced. It's also humorous at times. Can you talk about Donald Trump and this series? I see him in Slip It to Me as he appears in the paper, arm lifted in a “Heil Hilter” stance. 

CR: Ya, the newspaper is a great way to add pop culture/current events into the mix. It's whimsical and a little scary at times. And Trump, he's everywhere! He's popped up many times in the paintings—often getting painted out because he drives me crazy. In Slip It to Me he lays on the table like an object, maybe like a little statue. He's like some of the objects in the paintings with table "offerings" that I don't like, like the avocado in Pink Man with Avocado Offering. The objects were kinda metaphors of things someone could offer you physically and spiritually, some of them desirable and some not so desirable. 

GLL: Yes, about the “offerings,” I'm really interested in how you use objects—flowers, fruit, vessels—as symbols. Do they all hold specific meaning? If so, do you borrow their significance from art history? 

CR: The objects and flowers can be read as part of a long history of this sort of imagery in painting. Specifically, I think of Dutch still life painting. In those paintings—I'm specifically thinking of Wybrand Hendriks's Flower Still Life in the Portland Art Museum's collection—every flower has a meaning, every fabric, all the way down to the one dirty fly perched on one of the flowers. It's so voluptuous and sensual, but then there's a dirty fly there to fuck up your hot moment with this painting. And perhaps the realist part of the painting is the nasty fly just hanging out. I love it! So gross! In my work, I'm not THAT invested in a universal meaning, but rather a mix of gestural meaning and symbolism. The meaning is more personal than universal. Like how a cup of water means life, flowers mean sex or body is more universal, whereas the avocado is more personal. I hate avocados. 

Wybrand Hendriks, Flower Still Life, 1810/1830, oil on panel, Portland Art Museum Collection

Wybrand Hendriks, Flower Still Life, 1810/1830, oil on panel, Portland Art Museum Collection

GLL: How about your figures? They appear like symbols in how they are almost "unspecific" or anonymous. Do you feel that way about them, or are they more individual than that for you? 

CR: Most of the time the figures are someone specific, but as they get worked over, printed painted and drawn, they become more like a composite of men. You can see that many of the marks from the painting of "Kyle" are borrowed from the earlier drawing. The initial small drawing/collage was based off of a photo someone sent me. I then merged part of the drawing with the painting using a silkscreen method because I thought the long torso was similar to Kyle's body type. But like in Avocado Offering, the figure is obscured to the point that he reads more like a universal man. And like in life, some guys are more memorable than others, or the idea of them is better than the details. 

GLL: Can you talk about how you think about and approach perspective? I'm specifically thinking of the wonderfully skewed perspective in Avocado Offering.

Untitled (Pink Man with Avocado Offering), 2016, monotype and acrylic on newsprint, 22.5 x 26"

Untitled (Pink Man with Avocado Offering), 2016, monotype and acrylic on newsprint, 22.5 x 26"

CR: Perspective is something I've been thinking about a lot. Your questions about the table is a consequence of how I build images. I still utilize collage. Sometimes in paper form as well as digital. The collages sometimes create funky perspectives and sometimes when I work digitally the bodies become more elongated and awkward. In both situations, I think it's more about depicting the psychology of space or someone. It's meant to come across as awkward or "not right." Both the forms and color are meant to have more visceral effects than contain literal information. 

When people ask me about "perspective," they are often concerned with how I position myself to my subjects. I often make work in 2nd or 3rd person. It's often the perspective of an artist looking at their subjects or the perspective of a camera man. IDK how I would ever paint myself in 1st person. That might be getting too personal. Lol.

GLL: Haha, maybe it’s something to experiment with! My last question is about NYC. I also left Portland to study in New York, and found that the city had a profound impact on how I view and think about art. How has the city shaped and influenced your work and painting practice? What are your favorite and least favorite things about NY?

CR: Moving to NY was a VERY humbling experience. Obviously Portland and NY are VERY different. In some ways better and some ways worse. But as far as my work goes, moving to NYC and doing grad school at Hunter was a great way to shake up what I was making in Portland. I feel like after a few semesters, I've learned to become more critical of my own work and I started to question my own motives and process. Before NY, I think my work was very linear and there was a clear start with a clear finish when making it. Now, I find myself reworking ideas over and over until I get sick of them. 

This might sound strange, but I feel like I'm living more. It's nuts here. I am always on the go, seeing things, meeting people, working. This pressure-cooker type environment has done a lot for me in terms of production and energy. It has also caused me to go prematurely grey! But all of it is worth it. The opportunities are endless and so are the boys ;-)

And as far as school goes, I've been very blessed to work with artists like Carrie Moyer, Drew Beattie and AK Burns. They have done a lot in terms of shaping how I look and approach making work. I think the grad school setting has made me a lot more skeptical of art. I tend to not only question what it is I do and why, but also every other artist making work. As art becomes more commodified, I feel it's necessary to question all and everything being made and consumed, especially in NYC. 

My least favorite things about NY are: rats, weekend train rides to Brooklyn and litter! Yuck! That's one thing Portland does not put up with! But my favorite things about NYC...
1) The food here is amazing.
2) The history that is all around you when you live in a city that is a couple hundred years old. Time is a very humbling thing to think about.
3) The amount of amazing museums and quality shows that are open to the public. I see amazing art every week and it's great what that energy does for your mental health. And lastly,
4) The access to artists. You can reach out to almost anyone here and they'll respond, big or small. For a city that can feel so lonely at times, there is also a great sense of community if you know what you're looking for.

Untitled III, 2016, xerox and ink on paper, 9 x 12"

Untitled III, 2016, xerox and ink on paper, 9 x 12"

CHRISTIAN ROGERS' "READ IT AND WEEP" OPENS TOMORROW (3-5PM)

Join us tomorrow, Sunday, June 26 (3–5PM), for a small reception...

Layered atop the ubiquitous pink pages of the Financial Times, the intimate scenes on view within Christian Rogers’ solo exhibition at Nationale, Read It and Weep, foreground the body as a marker of time and place. Nude men lie languid, caught in private reverie, or pose coyly behind colorful offerings of fruit and flowers. Meanwhile, glowing eyes and comical faces float above the pressing horizon line, overseeing such proceedings with detached judgment. Time stands still—a fraught memory preserved, a quiet daydream infinitely suspended.

Rogers’ romantic scenes are in this manner at once both personal and common. His figures reveal the mark of his hand while also embodying a broader history through the inky names and dates of the still visible newsprint. These afforded glimpses of text also encourage a playful sort of analysis within his collaged landscapes. This urge for interpretation is only heightened by the indexical nature of the initial monotype process, wherein the ink outlines are visibly smudged during the transfer to paper.

While Rogers’ work remains rooted in the abstract tradition, it also, in this figurative and autobiographical impulse, parallels a movement towards what critic Jerry Saltz recently posited as “the art of the first person.” The human body becomes an active site of critical discussion, better able to communicate thoughts and issues than through the passive canvases of abstraction. As with Read It and Weep, while we may not grasp every layer, we are still able to identify and connect with Rogers’ universal sentiments. 

BIO
Christian Rogers received his BFA from Western Oregon University. He currently lives and works out of New York, NY, where he is also pursuing his MFA at Hunter College. Rogers has been the subject of numerous solo exhibitions at Stumptown Coffee Roasters (Portland, OR), and has also shown at Galerie Protégé, New York, NY; Canon Gallery of Art, Monmouth, OR; the University of North Dakota; Mary Lou Zeek Gallery, Salem, OR; and the Portland Art Museum’s Miller Gallery. Rogers’ work can be found within the permanent collections of the Western Oregon University Student Union and the Denver Art Museum. He is a 2016 Kossak Travel Grant recipient at Hunter College.

DELANEY ALLEN IN NEW MEXICO

A piece from Delaney Allen's 2012 series, Painting a Portrait now on view at 516 ARTS in New Mexico. 

A piece from Delaney Allen's 2012 series, Painting a Portrait now on view at 516 ARTS in New Mexico. 

Delaney Allen's photographs are currently on view in Albuquerque, NM, in Future Tense at 516 ARTS. This is part of the PhotoSummer 2016 exhibition programming in partnership with the University of New Mexico Art Museum. Take a look at this great interview co-curator of the exhibition, Stefan Jennings Batista, recently did with Delaney about his work and participation in the show. 

CONGRATULATIONS TO WILLIAM MATHESON !

Sending our congratulations to William Matheson, who just completed his MFA at Virginia Commonwealth University! We are excited to share a few new paintings from William, and looking forward to seeing what the future holds.

William Matheson, Remus and Romulus, 2016, oil on canvas, 32 x 46"

William Matheson, Remus and Romulus, 2016, oil on canvas, 32 x 46"

William Matheson, Back and Weathered Glove with Pearl, 2016, oil on panel,10 x 8" each

William Matheson, Back and Weathered Glove with Pearl, 2016, oil on panel,10 x 8" each

FAVE3: LUSI

DELANEY ALLEN, 2.1 (Documentation of Landscape), 2016, archival pigment print, 30 x 20" 

DELANEY ALLEN, 2.1 (Documentation of Landscape), 2016, archival pigment print, 30 x 20" 

This is one of my favorite pieces of Delaney's because it is simultaneously so simple and so complex; I love the bright light in the foreground contrasted with the deep blues and shadows of the back. It is calm while maintaing the eerie and fantastical nature of Delaney's work. 

Tote bag by MODERNWOMEN LA, modeled by Emma 

Tote bag by MODERNWOMEN LA, modeled by Emma 

My go-to carry all tote that packs a punch. A perfect statement piece with some pretty empowering text on the front. We are nothing without feminist art! 

Maggie Nelson, Bluets, Wave Books, 2009

Maggie Nelson, Bluets, Wave Books, 2009

"I have enjoyed telling people that I am writing a book about blue without actually doing it." 

I'm on a roll here with blues and gender and Maggie Nelson's Bluets combines the best of both worlds. For me, this is one of those books that I picked up once and will carry with me for the rest of my life and am so happy we carry it in our shop. A must read. 

INTERVIEW: TY ENNIS

Gallery artist Ty Ennis discusses his current series Stupid Man with Assistant Director, Gabi Lewton-Leopold. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Ty! 

Installation view of Stupid Man, on view through June 20, 2016

Installation view of Stupid Man, on view through June 20, 2016

Gabi Lewton-Leopold: In this new series, there’s a move away from your colorful works on paper that are often very detailed, to more abstract, mainly black and white acrylic paintings on canvas. What advantages did the latter medium give you? Why the shift in style and medium?

October 7th // Man Crushing the Dead, 2014, acrylic on paper, 15 x 11"

October 7th // Man Crushing the Dead, 2014, acrylic on paper, 15 x 11"

Ty Ennis: The advantage of the black and white acrylic was that I was able to work more loosely and I didn’t have to make color choices. With a small child and next to no studio time, I couldn’t rationalize spending hours simply deciding what colors I might use for a composition. I had also decided I was going to get back to basics with this work. I mean, High School basics, when painting was simple and free and fun and all the supplies were supplied by the school. I took it back even further and limited myself to just black and white. It was liberating. I was finding myself at work looking at the clock just dying for it to be time to clock out so I could get home and paint. I don’t remember that ever being the case with my studio practice. Art has always been a difficult endeavor for me. A real struggle. The style and medium choices allowed me to get more work out quicker, and I had agreed with myself to not be fussy but to just be myself, and if the piece I made on any given studio day was a keeper, but had some faults, we’d look at it later on and see if it was still needing adjustments. Almost every piece was set aside and in the end, I had grown to love each and everyone of them just as they were. This was a truly magical studio experience for me. Like I said, liberating.

GLL: What was the first painting you made for this series? 

TE: The first painting I produced for this show was a portrait of Ken Griffey Jr. It did not make the show, but served as my studio mascot.

The Kid, 2015, acrylic on canvas, 10 x 8"

The Kid, 2015, acrylic on canvas, 10 x 8"

GLL: I find something deceptively effortless (and I mean this in a positive way) about the work, a looseness, a sense of freedom. But when you really examine closely, you can feel how thoughtful and well-crafted they are. For example, the heron in The Clairvoyant. It’s composed of loose brush strokes but it’s so well-rendered and captures the serene and quiet beauty of the bird. Or, the cleverly obscured rabbit holding a tray in Zip's Drive In. What's your process like? Do you make sketches, and plans for each painting or is it more spontaneous?

The Clairvoyant (Blue Heron), 2016 , acrylic on canvas, 16 x 12”

The Clairvoyant (Blue Heron), 2016 , acrylic on canvas, 16 x 12”

TE: I never do sketches and I don’t say that in a “I don’t need to” sort of way. I often find that if I sketch something out, I have difficulty in reproducing it and get all caught up in loving the sketch more than the piece itself. So, I avoid it completely. The heron came easy, the rabbit was the result of absolute frustration. So, I guess I approach each canvas with my fingers crossed.

Zip's Drive In, 2016, acrylic on canvas, 10 x 8"

Zip's Drive In, 2016, acrylic on canvas, 10 x 8"

GLL: Does your printmaking background inform your painting practice? Do you think there’s a relationship between the two or do you see them as completely different methods? (also interesting that you painted a version of the Goya print)

Goya, Capricho No. 4: El de la rollona (Nanny's Boy), 1799, etching, aquatint, drypoint

Goya, Capricho No. 4: El de la rollona (Nanny's Boy), 1799, etching, aquatint, drypoint

TE: Printmaking absolutely informs my work and even though I haven't set foot in a print studio in more than a decade, most of what I know about art I learned from printmakers: Tom Prochaska, Yoshi Kitai, Jayson Wynkoop, and Emily Ginsberg. 
I work in layers like a screen printer and from light to dark like an etcher. In the past when working on paper, it has been difficult, with ink, to go back in and rework things, pen or brush moves are much more deliberate. With acrylic on canvas, I feel I have unlimited moves. A painting is never ruined and prints so easily are. You go back into a drawing or print and paint something out and you just highlight your imperfections. Some of these paintings in this show are paintings on top of paintings. Hell, Iggy Papa is a painting on top of a painting on top of a painting on top of a painting. And yes, I love that Goya print so much! It’s an example of a perfect piece of art in my opinion. It resonates with me deeply and on many levels and since the first time I saw it back in a history of printmaking class I took with Morgan Walker at the Gilkey Center at PAM fifteen years ago, the image has just been clawing at me. I finally let him/her out. There are a few “covers” in this show. El de la rollona is one of them.

El de la rollona (Mama’s Boy // After Goya), 2016, acrylic on canvas, 10 x 8"

El de la rollona (Mama’s Boy // After Goya), 2016, acrylic on canvas, 10 x 8"

GLL: Can you talk more about your process for deciding on specific imagery for this series? We’ve got the gingerbread man, Sam Sheepdog, Iggy Pop, and so forth. Do they represent important influences on your life? Do you see them as symbols or relics from your past?

TE: I said earlier that I don’t do sketches. Instead, I take a lot of notes, I write things down on post-its and type ideas into my phone. With that information, I start to see patterns and recognize reoccurrences. From there the information starts to grow and become more concrete in my mind and I start to visualize how things “might” look. It all starts to act as a daisy chain, where the images/ideas begin to play off of one another and start the process of becoming one unified composition/show. There is always a common thread. With that being said—and hopefully not further confusing the matter—the characters I chose to present are all characters I have a deep connection to. They could have all be titled as Self Portraits really. I did a series of gingerbread man drawings a few years back for a project with Matthew Kyba.

Untitled, 2014, graphite and ink on paper, 7 x 5"

Untitled, 2014, graphite and ink on paper, 7 x 5"

They really did feel like self portraits at the time, so naive, dumb, waving, and vulnerable. I was feeling really bad about myself at that time and this little figurine May had bought me was really mirroring my emotions. Sam Sheepdog is an old Looney Tunes character that clocks-in each day to go head-to-head with Ralph Wolf, who is essentially Wile E. Coyote. They greet each other in the morning... ”Mornin’ Sam” “Mornin’ Ralph”... and then put on their daily performance, Sam continually catching and punishing Ralph, in his attempts to get the sheep Sam protects. At the end of the day, they clock out and a new dog and a new coyote relieve them. I was thinking a lot about work here and the way in which I show up every morning as my “work-self” and put on a performance of sorts. I play a dumbed-down version of myself day-in and day-out, so I can come home to my family and my studio where I can actually be my true self again.

Clocked In (Sam Sheepdog), 2016, acrylic on canvas, 14 x 11"

Clocked In (Sam Sheepdog), 2016, acrylic on canvas, 14 x 11"

GLL: This new series also has many obscured faces (Iggy Papa, La Buffoon, Cowboy Shadows, El de la rollona, Clocked In (Sam Sheepdog), etc). Your subjects almost become more mysterious, and perhaps less specific because of this. Can you talk about your thinking behind the faces in the show?

TE: Once again I’ll refer to the Ken Griffey Jr. piece that is not in the show. In the very early stages of this body of work, I was working on drawing Ken Griffey Jr.’s Upper Deck rookie card from memory. An exercise to simply get me back into practice, I drew a handful of them in ink on paper and then decided that I liked the image so much I should paint a final version on canvas. I did this portrait in black and white and then hung it on the wall of my studio. I had put so much time and energy into this one piece that I kind of returned to point A and really had no idea what direction the work might go. Portraits of childhood heroes or portraits of present day heroes? I did a large colorful portrait of Charlie Parker on paper and another portrait of Griffey playing in the field and again, was right back to point A. I was listening to Lou Reed’s The Bells a lot in the studio at this point and decided that I was going to do a portrait of Lou Reed from that record’s cover, straight up in black and white just like the Griffey one. I hung it on the wall next to the Griffey painting and I had my first two paintings. Only problem being, they had NO soul. I kept coming back, seeing these paintings and just kind of dying of boredom. I took the Lou Reed painting and masked his face behind fishnet. I kind of liked it. I kind of hated it. I got frustrated and just ruined it. I blacked it out. I thought back to my last show, JKJKJK, and remembered the crude figures from that show and some of the textures I was getting from working loosely, and a light bulb went off. I remembered how much I loved working on them as well and decided that was the direction I was going to take with this work. 

Man with Monkey (L) & Spanker (R) from JKJKJK, 2012

Man with Monkey (L) & Spanker (R) from JKJKJK, 2012

I painted Lou Reed’s face in this fashion and he was no longer Lou Reed, he was a reflection of my own frustrated self and the painting now had enormous weight and things came very freely. The plan became to be myself. I’m not a portrait painter. I’m not an illustrator. I’m a painter. With this show especially, I wanted to be a painter. I took the Griffey piece down from the wall and extracted a whole tube of violet paint across his eyes, the eyes that I had just spent hours getting perfect. And somehow, it brought the dead painting to life. For me, at least.

La Buffoon, 2016, acrylic on canvas, 10 x 8"

La Buffoon, 2016, acrylic on canvas, 10 x 8"

GLL: You often draw imagery from your childhood growing up in Spokane, WA. How has it influenced this series? 

TE: Spokane is a merit badge I wear. The heron, the cowboy, the buck skinner, the fast food rabbit, they are all icons from my own personal experience. My own upbringing. In talking about Sam Sheepdog and my day job where I put on this act of portraying my work-self, what comes with that is also this realization while working with large groups of people that I don’t have many common interests with my co-workers, we don’t recall the same things from our youth from living on the same earth for roughly the same amount of years. I’ve seen so many instances where two, three, four, five people just mesh. You set them at a table and they have these long conversations where their recollections from childhood are almost synchronized. I’ve come to realize that with my co-workers I like some of the same music, but I can never remember the movies from the 80’s and 90’s that are quoted, I can’t join in on the Star Wars conversations that happen, far too often by the way, and I can’t relate with most people’s travel stories. My childhood was spent in Spokane and inside my own head, daydreaming, wandering. I had interests of course, I skateboarded and played baseball and ice hockey, I read, listened to music, I watched movies, but I didn’t retain much from any of these things. I could write a novel about listening to Pearl Jam Ten in sixth grade or Wu-Tang in the eighth and all of the places in which I listened to them, but I can’t recite more than three or four lines from either, and I listened to them a lot. A lot. And Wu-Tang I still do. Same goes for Elliott Smith and his albums later on into college. From all of these experiences, what I have retained are the experiences themselves. Little vignettes where the music served as a soundtrack. That doesn’t translate into a universal conversation that you can bring to a table, it’s way too personal. This has isolated me. It has made me unique, I suppose, but ultimately, lonely. Spokane was my WORLD. I can’t help but return to it when I sit down and try to process things or express myself. It’s the stage everything played out on for me. I know myself. I know Spokane. I don’t know much else. I think a person’s place of upbringing is monumentally important. I recently read that Ingmar Bergman once stated that regardless of where he was born and raised he would still be the Ingmar Bergman we know. That’s bullshit.

GLL: Much of this work and your past work, is deeply personal and seems to grapple with ideas and perhaps misconceptions on what it means to be a MAN. How does masculinity and the struggle for finding that identity play into this work?

TE: It’s a tough subject for me to talk about. That’s probably why it comes up in my work so often. My work is where my most intimate and personal conversations take place and they’re still encrypted. I’m 35 years old and I’m still learning how to speak. I read a lot, I surround myself with our language, I try to immerse myself in it so that I can express myself clearly and eloquently. I want to SPEAK. But, I just trip on my tongue. I think I grew up with a learning disability that I was completely unaware of. I don’t have a clear and tight grasp on things. So much of being a MAN is being able to communicate clearly, stand up for yourself, set good examples, and be strong in the process. To inspire. Then there’s this other aspect where you have to be physically strong and good with your hands and not make mistakes. You have to be witty and on point. A good MAN can’t ask questions. He has to know the answers. He’s gotta be in tune with nature and know how to tie all of the knots. Set up a camp. Dig himself out of snowdrift. Swim himself to safety. He has to be good with power tools and automotive shit. He has to protect himself and his family and not show sweat. He’s gotta be prepared for the big one. He has to fend off intruders. The list goes on and on and on. And each of these things has to be handled with the utmost confidence. My understanding, is that in our society, if you’re not into certain things and don’t know certain things, then you’re not a man, and I’m left feeling unmanly all of the time. My masculinity is challenged daily. I’m still getting bullied at 35 on a regular basis. My work is from the perspective of the flashlight holder.

GLL: I think that comes through because along with that idea of masculinity there is also a softness, a tenderness and even a sense of humor to this series that seems to counter that need to be a “tough guy.” It also feels personal and universal at the same time.

TE: We need to laugh more. We need to laugh at the “tough guy” more. Fuck the tough guys. It has gone too far, they’ve had their turn. My daughter lately has been telling me, “Be happy, Papa!” I have no idea where she got this, but seriously, happiness needs to be the universal theme. It’s got to be. 

GLL: There are big vinyl letters on the wall that say your name and then “Stupid Man” below. Can you talk about the title Stupid Man? Is it meant to be self-deprecating?

TE: Yes and no. I have low self esteem, I’m insecure, I suffer from social anxiety, I grew up wetting my bed and sucking my thumb. I was called a pussy and a fag a lot as a child and even when I first moved here to Portland in ’99 I had people yell, “fags” at my roommate and I from their car window as we walked down the street. I’ve never felt masculine or manly in the slightest. I have always been afraid of men and feel that my work comes from my feminine side. I guess none of this has to do with being “stupid,” but it has to do with being misunderstood and judged. I mentioned earlier that I often trip over my tongue. I am not comfortable with the words that come out of my mouth a lot of times. I feel I poorly represent myself with my speech. I don’t have a large vocabulary and my dictionary app is my best friend. You would be surprised by some of the words I’ve looked up over the last six months. I know that I am not, but I often feel stupid. My geography, world history, and politics are bad, I am working on these things now at 35, because none of it stuck in my teens. I feel behind. In addition to all of this, my heroes are intellectual, activist types. The ones that stand up for themselves, liberate themselves. Iggy Pop and Lou Reed, who both appear in this show for example. They embrace their femininity and give the middle finger to the Man’s man. Last summer, when I had finally figured out where this show was going and what themes I was working with, when I was actually able to envision how this work might appear, May and I were at our friends’ house for dinner and The Bells came on. It begins with the track Stupid Man. A beautiful song about a deadbeat dad that only Lou Reed could write. I remember as it came on telling May that my show was going to be titled Stupid Man, and we just laughed.

GLL: You showed two studies or “failed” paintings during our group studies show in February. One was of a woman (though the canvas was sliced down the middle) in a long dress and heels. After thinking about that piece I realized that there are no images of women in the final show. Was that a conscious decision to remove the female subjects to focus on notions of masculinity?

Study for Woman with Black Gloves, 2015, acrylic on canvas, 14 x 11"

Study for Woman with Black Gloves, 2015, acrylic on canvas, 14 x 11"

TE: You know, the figures in this show with their distorted faces and sexually cross-dressed attire are for the most part sexless. Only the buck skinner is a man, and that piece is from the perspective of the deer really, or the sickened child as the man’s spectator. In Cowboy Shadows, the real protagonist is the shadow. Those paintings are apologies of sorts to my father. And in other ways to my girlfriend and our daughter. I’m sorry I can’t be the Man that they might sometimes call upon. I’m sorry I was never able to impress my father or get his attention and that, as a result, that relationship fell flat. That my daughter has no grandfather as a consequence. It’s okay though, I’ve learned to live with it. Those conversations with her are going to be very difficult though. The figures in this show, Lou Reed and Iggy Pop, they seem to have similar takes as mine on the subject of masculinity and I don’t think they would take any offense as being seen as women. There are no MEN in this show.

Mick Rock, Bowie, Iggy and Lou, Dorchester Hotel, 1972

Mick Rock, Bowie, Iggy and Lou, Dorchester Hotel, 1972

TY ENNIS // CLOSING RECEPTION & CATALOG RELEASE PARTY

If you haven't yet had a chance to catch Stupid Man, stop by this Saturday 5:30 - 7:00 for a mellow closing reception. We will also be releasing NATIONALE19, the exhibition catalog which includes an essay by Daniel Kine.


STUPID MAN by DANIEL KINE

Simplicity involves unburdening one’s life. Errors, oversights, the language of critics. In defining a painting, one takes shots at defining the human experience. Failure, imperfection, hindrance. An honest painting is a reproduction of life, not a reproduction of art. Memory, object association, stories overheard or remembered or interpreted—often void of color or ostensible detail. 

The shift away from the perceptual, or the ability to interpret or become aware of something via the senses, is a modicum of insight into the 21st century experience. The twenty-four hour news cycle, the forty-hour work week, the filtered fifteen-second video. One is just as likely to witness footage from a plane crash on a pay-screen in the backseat of a taxi or on a muted television in a laundromat as they are to encounter an acquaintance in the street. And yet a distortion of reality does not take away from what is real. Perception is not malleable, even if reality is. 

The following collection of paintings were produced loosely, in a rapid manner, with very few materials. They represent development via the act of unburdening; adaption via restraint. Not a return, but a progression. A demonstration not in simplicity, but restriction. Their lack of color and ostensible detail leave one with the impression of an almost Eastern discipline. Pieces like The Clairvoyant (Blue Heron) and Buck Skinner exhibit an interrelation of shade and shape that seem to speak more to cognizance and memory than to image. And yet nothing is lost here. Rather, something veritable is gained through the artist’s demonstrable control. Comedy (Grandma’s Laughing Eskimo) & Tragedy (Grandma’s Crying Eskimo), more like found objects or abrupt memories, serve as an almost Proustian aide to remembrance or loss. The dreamlike quality of interpretation. The intimacy of subjectivity. 

As a whole, Stupid Man is a mingling of veiled emotions, representations and elusive, uneasy figures. Ennis’ subjects are an analysis of memory, experience. Representations not of subjects or forms or applied methods, but of sentiments. The impetuosity of youth. The obstruction of time. The burden of resolve.

DK
New York, May 2016


Daniel Kine is the author of the novels Between Nowhere and Happiness (2009, Smallhand Press) and Up Nights (2013, Ooligan Press). He was born in Toledo, OH, in 1984, and studied philosophy and literature in San Francisco, Mexico City, Guatemala, and Portland, OR. His writing has appeared in several publications, including Modern Review, Q Poetry, Pathways, and Indie Literature Now. Kine lives in Brooklyn, NY.

This essay was commissioned for the exhibition catalog accompanying Stupid Man and funded by the Regional Arts and Culture Council.

TY ENNIS // STUPID MAN

Stupid Man by Ty Ennis, on view through June 20, 2016 (images Mario Gallucci Studio)

Stupid Man by Ty Ennis, on view through June 20, 2016 (images Mario Gallucci Studio)

Clocked In (Sam Sheepdog), 2016, acrylic on canvas, 14 x 11”

Clocked In (Sam Sheepdog), 2016, acrylic on canvas, 14 x 11”

El de la rollona (Mama’s Boy // After Goya), 2016, acrylic on canvas, 14 x 11”

El de la rollona (Mama’s Boy // After Goya), 2016, acrylic on canvas, 14 x 11”

Iggy Papa, 2016, acrylic on canvas, 10 x 8"

Iggy Papa, 2016, acrylic on canvas, 10 x 8"

On view May 13–June 20, 2016
Opening reception Sunday, May 15 (3–6PM)
Closing reception & catalog release party Saturday, June 18 (5:30–7PM)

For his second solo exhibition at Nationale, Ty Ennis presents Stupid Man, a series of small black & white paintings that explore his present day-to-day life as an artist and young father with a full-time day job. Like most of his past work, they tell individual stories that are all part of a larger narrative. This new body of work, in its loose composition and black and white presentation, adds a more raw and stripped down layer to the ongoing monologue which has been the crux of Ennis’s work for the past twelve years. Although deeply personal and intimate, Stupid Man ultimately explores themes that inspire and challenge us all. 

Ty Ennis (born 1981, Spokane, WA) lives and works in Portland, OR, where he graduated from Pacific Northwest College of Art in 2003 with a BFA in Printmaking. His work was previously included in the 2006 Oregon Biennial at the Portland Art Museum. He has exhibited across Portland at Nationale, Open Gallery, New American Art Union, Pulliam Deffenbaugh, and the Art Gym at Marylhurst University; in Seattle, WA, at Prole Drift; and in Los Angeles, CA, at William H Bothy. Ennis is the recent recipient of a Project Grant from the Regional Arts & Culture Council and a Career Opportunity Grant from the Oregon Arts Commission. He joined Nationale as a represented artist in the spring of 2013.

This project was funded in part by the Regional Arts & Culture Council

INTERVIEW: DELANEY ALLEN

We recently caught up with Delaney Allen to discuss his current show A R T I F A C T  now on view at Nationale through May 9, 2016. 

Gabi Lewton-Leopold: Your current series A R T I F A C T takes on many themes and subjects, from costumed self-portraits to dramatic landscapes. Although we’ve seen these elements before in your earlier projects, there seems to be a deliberate move towards artifice and manipulation—digital collage, use of a green screen—within these images. Is digital alteration important to the series and to the overarching narrative?

Delaney Allen, Figure 1.14 (Self Portrait), 2016

Delaney Allen: Upon first examination, the intention is for one to enter into this world with a sense of mystery or bewilderment. Acting as a larger, overarching theme, the creation of something unknown, yet familiar, exists throughout A R T I F A C T. Manipulation is present but is a lesser, casual theme.

Speaking more towards manipulation, those devices were tools that I used like the application of camera itself. Utilizing those elements granted me the means to further the series in the way in which I am accustomed to working—individually without assistants (on location or in the studio). It also allowed the installation of new characters into the body of work, dissuading possible repetitiveness from reoccurring throughout. Those small facial glimpses were important, but the factors into their creation were less so. Once that revelation of digital manipulation is known concerning the creation of some imagery, the viewer can change their approach to the series. Eventually, that investigation and process came more as a means to problem solving and expansion than anything else.

GLL: Art historical references come across in the series—images referencing Dutch still life, Cubism, Dada, and Surrealism, among other influences. How do you see this work in relation to these movements of the past? 

DA: I referenced those movements as I began to frame the series. They were specifically key in building the still life imagery. When still life painting began, as in the early Dutch paintings, it started with flowers or kitchen items laid out on the table. At that point, they were referred to as fruit or flower pieces. With that, it became vital to adopt the idea into A R T I F A C T to lay the groundwork for building the fictional history. 

Figure 3.2Figure 3.3, and Figure 3.8 were direct responses to that early investigation. But with those familiar elements in place, I looked to move beyond a direct acknowledgment, feeling a need to blur the lines of art history. Figures 3.2 and 3.3, at least to me, show tendencies towards Cubism specifically.

Delaney Allen, Figure 3.2 (Still Life), 2016
Delaney Allen, Figure 3.3 (Still Life), 2016

Pablo Picasso’s still life, Mandolin and Guitar became a prominent fixture of reference when I began to dissect the images and build them back up again in the frame. Looking at Mandolin and Guitar, one can identify the similarities within my still lifes as I attempted to flatten and distance portions of the images. The same can be found in Figure 3.8 and its association with paintings like Georges Braque’s The Studio (Vase before a Window).

Pablo Picasso, Mandolin and Guitar, 1924

Georges Braque, The Studio (Vase before a Window)1939

Using mundane objects found within the studio, Figure 3.8 emulates the Cubist manner of breaking up and flattening of the image through color and line.

Delaney Allen, Figure 3.8 (Still Life), 2016

At the same time, those photographs, as well as others throughout the series, pull from the “New Formalism” movement occurring in photography at the moment. Artists such as Lucas Blalock and Daniel Gordon became aides when needing to look away from what one might consider straight photography. Although most New Formalism photographers give away their hand at play, I collected the ideas that their work is based on and implemented those in a less detectable way. While their photographs typically display the use of digital editing, I tried to minimize the moments in which I gave details away using similar processes.

Lucas Blalock, Strawberries (Fresh Forever), 2014

GLL: In many of your studio self-portraits, which are often filled with layered and textured fabrics, you allow us to see the materials used to create the work—tape, unprinted edges of fabric, the studio wall, your foot peeking out beneath fabric, and so forth. These moments take us out of the fantasy and expose the process. Why do you choose to include these elements? 

DA: With the studio portraits, I implemented certain elements and techniques when producing the work. Those components range from the flattening of the subject into sections of the background, veiling or masking occurring that mimicked some of the more abstracted landscape photography in the series, digital manipulation and smaller moments exposing the process like you mentioned. With the disclosure of those smaller moments specifically, my intention was to show the artist's hand in a way that would possibly direct the audience, at times, to questioning what they are seeing.

Beginning with the title of the work—A R T I F A C T—my objective was to build this fictitious community and history. But playing off the ideas of fact versus fiction, and even more pointedly, the belief in the history of photography that what we view is truth, I aimed for entry points that could allow for a sense of confusion or questioning that authenticity. We’re naturally taught to believe what is placed in front of us is truth. Knowing this, I purposefully designed and executed small giveaways hidden throughout the series that could discount that idea.

Delaney Allen, Figure 1.10 (Self Portrait), 2016

Expanding beyond the self portraits, these elements develop throughout the body of work. Still life images mixed physical and digital manipulation. Photographs would be dissected, at times applying new affects through rephotographing the imagery before doing any digital manipulation. Figure 3.4 exists completely as a level of manipulation to Figure 3.3

Delaney Allen, Figure 3.4 (Still Life), 2016
Delaney Allen, Figure 3.3 (Still Life), 2016

The image is solely a layer built in Photoshop that was applied to the still life. With its inclusion, it references that artist's hand previously mentioned. Landscape images contain these components as well. Paint applied in post-work allowed me, as the artist, to further control the environment that I built, as well as giving clues into the unnatural world that was assembled. Ultimately, what is displayed as fact will contain an either sizable or minuscule fiction.

GLL: Self-portraiture has long been a strong theme in your work. You’ve done so much to hide yourself, from covering your face in fabric, to now, in this current series, actually superimposing another face on your body. I can really feel the tension between presence and erasure of the artist within A R T I F A C T. What are your thoughts on the importance of self-portraiture within your practice? 

Delaney Allen, Self Portrait No. 1, 2011

Delaney Allen, Figure 1.6 (Self Portrait), 2016

DA: The importance of self-portraiture is huge in my approach to making. Dating back to when I was introduced to French auteur theory as an undergraduate studying film, I found issues with the amount of authority and collaboration in film and who, ultimately, could control aspects of the final product. I slowly began the shift away from filmmaking and towards photography, eventually settling on the mindset that self-portraiture, to me, is a truer form of individual art-making.

Who ultimately owns a photograph in regard to its finalized outcome? When considering portrait photography, does the truth lie on the sitter or the photographer, or does a combination lead to a partnership? Questioning these involvements within photography has been the root of how I fashion my practice, specifically in my handling of portraiture. With A R T I F A C T, the management of the sitter/photographer issue led the work to a slight blurring of lines when incorporating new approaches and techniques. Spending months scouring various fashion magazines, I amassed dozens of assorted aspects of the human body with the idea of assimilating them into the series. Ultimately building this fantasy-driven community from scratch using my frame as a template. With this unique approach, I retained control of the figure while allowing the slight, unveiled components to build individual portraits for the series.

As mentioned, with the presence and erasure of the artist, the concept of blending found imagery with self-portraiture granted the series the illusion of a society built out of the artist. If I explicitly used myself, my facial features in each portrait, A R T I F A C T would have suffered a limited narrative, failing to root the viewer in the environment. Purposely masking figures, incorporating others faces and collaging of images, allowed for a development within my particular history of self-portraiture.

GLL: Along with self-portraiture, the natural world is a consistent subject as well. At times they act as contrasting elements, and in other images they meet (specifically in Figure 1.1Figure 1.3Figure 1.14). What are your thoughts on how these different subjects coalesce in one body of work? 

DA: It was predetermined while scouting and shooting to pursue and demonstrate, through scenery, the themes constructed around the series. The inclusion of the abstracted photographs mimic the shrouding apparent within the portrait work. Shot in Oregon, California, and Texas, images such as Figure 2.6 contribute to the collapsed frame, allowing for a disorientation apparent in the work. Although working in a more straight photography means, A R T I F A C T ’s abstracted landscapes place the viewer into the unfamiliar with slight, albeit abstruse, glimpses into the perceived world.

To a lesser degree, the series further recognizes the imaginative world through Figure 2.3 and Figure 2.11. The inclusion of these two images deliberately presents a broader look into nature, fighting against the disorientation of the other images and giving pause within the work. Each image, photographed in Utah and Wyoming, were investigated for their unworldly look, and ultimately implemented into the creation showcasing a more vast look into the perceived world.

Delaney Allen, Figure 2.3 (Documentation of Landscape), 2016

Actualizing the addition of self-portraiture into natural scenes acted as the biggest strengthening for the series as the editing process began. These images, like you mention with Figure 1.1, 1.3, and 1.14, were thought to be the foundation of the work when I began the series. This endeavor was crucial to the development of a conceivable world connecting and uniting the images as a whole. Necessary to the evolution of building a history, these photographs were first generated as varying landscape imagery sans figures. Shot at dusk or night while traveling throughout the deserts of the Western US, experimentation with flash photography’s effects within the frame, led to the materialization of the final images. After collecting photographs shot in nature during various trips, I moved into the studio to photograph each figure that would ultimately resolve my initial vision. The incorporation of each figure into the selected backgrounds supplemented the series, securing constructed, snapshot-like photographs lending plausibility to the group of people.

Delaney Allen, Figure 1.3 (Self Portrait), 2016

GLL: We’ve seen the inclusion of sculptural elements in this show and Getting Lost in 2014. What was the initial impetus for going this direction? Do you have plans to go even further towards installation-based work?  

Delaney Allen, Figure 4.3, 2016

DA: That specific direction was a challenge I set for myself at the start of the new work. From my first series in 2010, until now with A R T I F A C T, I’ve tried to include a minor twist in my approach, creation, and completion of each body of work. I wanted to add to my toolbox as an artist with the inclusion of sculptural and painting elements. I needed that test to decipher something different.

At times, it feels artists can become stagnant in their growth as makers. We make a new series, some success or recognition comes, and we either feel comfortable with reapplying that approach, or are fearful to probe and develop beyond that. I assess each new series with a mindset that the application of an unexpected element, can and should arise, confronting the artist as well as the audience. With A R T I F A C T specifically, it moves beyond just the sculptures and paintings to include the understanding of digital editing, and ultimately an understanding of myself. Can I make these images I’m seeing in my head a reality with the incorporation of editing techniques I’ve never tried? Am I comfortable wandering into the woods alone at night for a photograph? Will waiting until the sun sets in the middle of the desert enable me to get the picture I’m envisioning even though I’ll be hiking back to the car in the dark? The entirety of these elements led me, I feel, to making the most challenging work I have to this point in my career. With that being said, I would expect for each subsequent body of work to examine these issues again. At the moment, I can’t see having a straight sculpture-based show in the future (but don’t hold me to that).

Delaney Allen, Figure 1.5 (Self Portrait), 2016
Delaney Allen, Figure 3.7 (Still Life), 2016
Delaney Allen, Figure 2.1 (Documentation of Landscape), 2016

MAY DAY SALE (MAY 1–9)

Nationale is happy to share news of its May Day sale, May 1–May 9, 2016. Items from our home & beauty section—including MCMC fragrances, GRAIN design, Iacoli & McAllister, papier d’Armenie—and select art books will be greatly discounted (up to 40% off). Sale items will also include other beauty lines (Jao & Nuxe), select magazines (Tunica & Lapham’s), small press, and one-offs from local makers (Liam Drain, The Granite, Fredrik Averin). For the budding art collector, the sale extends to the backroom gallery with 10% off art works from past shows—the perfect time to start or add to your collection!