Artists, supposedly, are not good at sports. But since art can be extremely competitive, I propose that artists embrace a competitive spirit and the values of sportsmanship (or is it sports-person-ship?).

—

To help get the ball rolling (ahem!), below are some sporty expressions. They’re the sand, you’re the oyster, and one day, you’ll have pearls — of wisdom! — at just the right art moments…

Preparing for a critique or meeting with a gallerist? Try slapping both your cheeks simultaneously and shouting, “Game time, baby!” If that doesn’t work, try throwing lots of uppercuts into the air and repeating, “Who’s the boss?”

Bummed about how hard it is to be an artist? Bemoaning scarcity? Try saying, “Suck it up!” Then go “walk it off.”

Can’t decide if your photo is worth the $400 back-mounting you envisioned? Even though it’s Nike’s slogan, I like “Leave nothing.” It’s about sacrifice, performance, action over words — in essence, “Give it your all” so you won’t have any regrets.

When the art ideas are facile, remember: “Don’t be a three page book.” (Paris Alexander)

There are almost always more deserving artists than available rewards. Remember: “Winning isn’t everything.”

Let’s commend artists with lots of “heart.” Not everyone can be the champ, but you can put on a good show with extraordinary persistence and courage. Lots of people root for the underdog.

Graceful concessions: I wish more artists could say “Good game.” Be happy for others’ successes, instead of comparing others’ accomplishments with their own.

—

Got the drill? Try to come up with art scenarios for these:

“Go big or go home.”

“It’s not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog.” (I’m not Michael Vicking it — the metaphor’s for boxing, OK?)

“Lesson No. 1: How to take a fall!”

“He’s just doin’ moves.” (This newfangled adage, from mixed martial arts, is a criticism of a fighter who is not trying hard enough to damage his opponent. “Doin’ moves” is similar to “going through the motions,” but with the intent to appear active.)

“He’s not made of wood.” Bunkerd Faphimi, a Muay Thai fighter, explains why he approaches fights without fear this way: Any opponent “will only have two arms and two legs, like me. He’s not made of wood.”

Would love to see Unmonumental, the inaugural exhibition at the New Museum of Contemporary Art in New York. It sounds like a really smart, timely curatorial proposition around un-heroic, modest tendencies in sculptural assemblage. 

In my own work, I’ve become more interested in art that just is, and doesn’t attempt to transcend its base materiality with illusion. Or allusion.

When I look at art now, I’m hyper-aware of artistic decisions that beg viewers to ignore conceptual or material details. I’m skeptical of modest scales that seem more to do with an economy of means, than how a work interacts with a space. I’m especially skeptical of materials that don’t reinforce content or concept. Objects (and art materials) have a life of their own — a manufactured history, a cultural value — and the act of incorporating something into one’s art doesn’t mean it’s become an object limited to visual significance. This is why I responded negatively to Louise Nevelson’s work at the De Young Museum: as a viewer, I felt compelled to ignore the spray paint, moulding and table legs, and felt that I would only “get it” if I could see compositions of shape and gradients of light. In contrast, Isa Genzkin, whose work is in the New Museum show, allows the viewer to see the crappy objects of her assemblage as what they are: blinds, PVC hose, all the useless junk crowding our garages and filling our landfills. 

This is in contrast with engaging with art on visual or formal terms. Sure, I’m still interested in how a thing looks or how it’s made, but using those criteria only can result in seeking only the most visually stunning or technically baffling. This feels to me more like channel surfing, than really engaging with art.

Creative Screen Tech burned a meticulous stencil. I would never have guessed that I could screen print 1 pt. line weights or 12 pt. text. Who knew? The services cost more than I expected ($50 to reclaim the screen, output film and burn a stencil), but I got a great deal on a squeegee with a chipped handle ($5). Sixty prints took no time at all. See a preview image on the home page of my site. Details of the finished project will be posted in February.  

Went to the opening of The Little Show at Swarm Gallery in Oakland last night. I thought Swarm directors Svea and Andrea did a great job making sense of the huge amount of work (75+ artists!). Earlier that day I just moped around the house with a sore throat, but I was glad I made it out… Oakland people out at a great time in an Oakland gallery. 

Lorem Ipsum #3, 2007, graphite, vellum, acrylic sheet, nails, 4.5 x 5.5 inches

Ran into Casey Jex Smith, who asked me about my contribution to The Little Show. I selected a piece from a new project called Lorem Ipsum. The work is meant to look like a wall text. I wasn’t worried about it looking too much like a print — until Casey mentioned that he didn’t know it’s actually a drawing!So, erm, in case you, too, were wondering — it’s a drawing. Cheers!