Foundation 2D 1 – G6 – Page 2

My Line is Emo: Some Idealization and more Experimentation

At this stage I was still pretty confused with what I wanted to do. So I made multiple patterns with different objects that I found around my home. Thus almost all of them look like ‘fabric prints’, with no actual narrative and composition.

During consultation everyone agreed that this depicts the feeling of Tenseness. To portray the emotion, I used satay sticks dipped in Chinese ink then carefully press it onto the paper at different angles. It looks like war zone with spears sticking out of the ground everywhere or a laser security system. We interpret the diagonal lines as twisted or warp state of mind; something is not right kind of feeling.

I see surprises as an explosive emotion. The shock you feel happens in an instant; then it fades away. The second piece was rejected as it does not fit the description as well as the first.

When I feel regret, I desperately want to turn back time and amend my mistakes. But since there is no such thing as time travelling, the only thing that I could do is patch things up the best I can. However no matter how well you try to fix it, it’ll never be the same again.

I tore a piece of print I made smearing Acrylic paint with a plastic bag. Then paste it onto the strip while purposely leaving empty spaces to be patch up with bigger pieces.

I made this piece with the intention of positive emotions. Using a satay stick, I spread the paint in a wavy motion diagonally. Mixing the black and white, sometime more black and sometimes more white to show the happiness and disappointments in love.

I tried connecting two blotch of paint from different ends to depict attraction. Maybe it is too direct? Too simple? There is no narrative behind it thus it is somewhat boring.

I thought these pieces described Disgust because of the veins and holes in the paint. But others do not agree because of the fluidity of the veins, how gentle it looks and the gradient from the mixed paint.

At first I thought this could show disgust because of the multiple ‘holes’; trypophobia triggering. But I guess the concept is not strong enough because normally we associate bubbles with joy and happy children trying to pop them. I also think the bubbles create a dreamy effect which could also show Tranquility.

These are what I imagine my mind to look like when I feel irritated or annoyed. Being irritated is like hearing this continuous buzzing that would not stop and would keep building up in your head until you burst out in anger. Being annoy is also the same concept but much stronger than being irritated. Both were rejected because of the lack of dynamics, narrative and composition.

Next course of action:

The next step I am going to take is to think about the narrative and composition of the emotions. What is the story behind my strip? How does it describe the emotion? What part of anger do I want to represent in my strip?

Also the use of materials/ medium in my concept. Maybe explore the different kinds of paper? Handmade paper was suggested in the consultation to achieve a very textured paper. For anger perhaps I could just texturize the paper by beating the crap out of it?

Other rejects:

Next Post: https://oss.adm.ntu.edu.sg/ytan149/my-line-is-emo-development/

My Line is Emo: Research and Experimentation

“The notion of origins, the promotion of inexpert forms of expression, as well as the “discovery” of the uncharted subconscious realm as unveiled by Sigmund Freud, unleashed a creative frenzy in the era of surrealism and resulted in the invention (or reinvention) of many drawings and drawing-based techniques: Automatic drawing, …” (Jones, 10)

English translation by Hollo from “On The Veiled Swings” by Jean Arp

The book ‘talks’ about chance drawings and collages with the example of Jeans (born Hans) Arp, a German-French poet, artist etc. He had a peculiar way of writing his poems where he would “close his eyes and randomly underline words and sentences in newspaper articles and advertisements that would become the foundations for his poems.” (Jones, 19)

Jeans (born Hans) Arp, Germany, 1886-1966, active France and Switzerland, Automatic Drawing, 1917-18, Ink and Graphite, 16 3/4 x 21 1/4 in. (42.6 x 54 cm), The Museum of Modern Art, New York, given anonymously

“For Arp, chance manifested the order (or disorder) of nature to which he aimed to connect, rather than his unconscious. His so-called automatic drawing beginning in 1917, for example, are derived from his wanderings in nature, not from the wanderings of his mind. Drawn after his habitual nature walks, the works capture Arp’s recollection of trees, branches, and other plant life.” (Jones, 19)

“Essential to the process was speed. “When one goes very quickly, the drawing is mediumistic. as if dictated by the unconscious.”” (Jones, 25) So the faster you draw, the less you think. Therefore the drawing is more from one’s sub-conscious.

The Birth of the World, Joan Miró, Spanish,1925. Oil on canvas, 8′ 2 3/4″ x 6′ 6 3/4″ (250.8 x 200 cm), https://www.moma.org/learn/moma_learning/joan-miro-the-birth-of-the-world

In the same page it also mentions Joan Miro. The “loosely drawn and schematic nature functions like multivalent pictograms or signs; that is a single form may connote several different meanings.” (Jones, 27)

After gaining some knowledge of automatic techniques, I became very eager to try them all out.

Strings:

This is the first mono-printing I did. I just played around and see what effects it would create.

I tried putting crochet flowers in to see if the ink would penetrate the tiny openings. They did not; perhaps because the strings were knotted too tightly.

Here I tried with strings of different thickness.

… and strings of a single width…

Net:

I thought mono-printing a net would result in a print of a net because the ink would have passed through the holes of the net. But that did not happened; with and without the printing-press.

I was able to achieve the print of the net only by inking it and pressing it under the printing-press.

Brush:

Bubbles:

Bubbles bring about a dreamy effect. They are related to positive emotions; I could use them for Joy, Love or Surprise.

Fork:

I did not expect the stamping of a fork would look this terrifying and intense.

Seashells:

These are prints made from the stamping of seashells that I picked from a beach in New Zealand long ago.

Automatic Techniques:

I made an attempt with pressing paint between papers that mixes the paint and creating interesting vein-like texture.

I was very interested in the Fumage technique and wanted to try it for myself.

Miscellaneous:

Here I tried to make the impasto textured effect with acrylic paint and a fork. The attempt to keep the swirls of black and white was a failure; and it was not as textured as I liked it to be.

Next Post: https://oss.adm.ntu.edu.sg/ytan149/my-line-is-emo-some-idealization-and-more-experimentation/

Reference:

Jones, Leslie, 2012, Drawing Surrealism, Los Angeles, CA : Los Angeles County Museum of Art ; Munich : Prestel, [2012]

My Line is Emo: Ed Moses

I was going through all the artist reference listed in the project brief and Ed Moses’s drawings really stood out to me. The images that turned up when I googled “ed moses drawings” really drew me in and my mind sparked ideas for the project.

However I found that it was quite a challenge to search information online. Everything was so private since the museums did not give anything away. So I went to the ADM Library to borrow the Ed Moses book which was much easier since it had all that I was looking for. The book allows a more intimate connection between the reader and Ed Moses because of the interviews recorded in it.

From what I have gathered, Ed Moses does a lot of experimentation on materials and techniques in his work. He is constantly taking risks, trying out new materials and testing new forms; moving away from his comfort zone.

“Untitled (Hegeman Series)” , 1970| acrylic, resin & masking tape on canvas| 77″ x 95″| Collection of Cedd and Pamela Moses

https://vimeo.com/176224264

Ed Moses used resin for his Hegemann Series and I thought it was really interesting. In the book he stated that by putting the canvas face down on a big Mylar table, he could pour resin on the backside and it would bleed through the canvas out to the edge. He would then put fiberglass cloth around the edge to give it some structure. When it dried, he would peel the whole thing off and the result will be a surprise. The resin embedded in the canvas, as were the snap lines- they turned out shiny in some places and flat in others.

Why do you paint on both sides of the canvas?

That was what Frances Colpitt, a professor and Deedie Potter Rose chair of art history from Texas Christian University, asked Ed Moses. He mentioned of his discovery of ‘ghost’ painting when he reversed the canvas and the ghost images came through, which he liked a lot. So he wanted to put some kind of mark to it that indicated he made it, rather than being ‘found’. His idea of these ‘ghost’ paintings really intrigues me. It is like recycling an artwork when you don’t like it. Or creating a 2 in one.

Below are some of the works that I picked out from the book.

Rafe Bone, 1958| Oil on Canvas|72 7/8″ x 65 1/2″| Collection of Hanna Finkelstein, Los Angeles, CA

Rose #6, 1963| Graphite and acrylic on Strathmore board| 60″ x 40″| Collection of the artist

Cut Place #4, 1966|Graphite and paper foldout|13″ x 16 3/8″| Collection of Avilda Moses, Ojai, CA

Pulled Warp, 1972| Acrylic and masking tape on canvas| 66″ x 78″| Collection of Murray and Ruth Gribin Family Trust, Beverly Hills, CA

Broken Wedge A/1, 1973| Rhoplex and pigment on laminated tissue|84″ x 72″|Collection of the artist

NY Trac, 1974| Acrylic and tissue on nylon| 72″ x 84″| Collection of the artist

Red W-L, 1982| Acrylic on wood panels| 84″ x 122″| Collection of the artist

Bak, 1988-89| Acrylic and oil on canvas|96″ x 60″| Collection of the artist

Cocoteni, 1989| Acrylic and oil on canvas| 78″ x 132″| Collection of Fabian Carisson, New York, NY

Ranken #2, 1992| Acrylic and asphaltum on canvas| 60″ x 48″| The Molly and Walter Bariess Family Collection

Bozook, 2002| Acrylic on canvas| 96″ x 120″| Collection of the artist

So-Wh, 2004| Acrylic on canvas| 72″ x 60″|Collection of the artist

Cta-Hola, 2006|Acrylic on canvas|78″ x 66″| Collection of Jayne D. Murrell, Newport Beach, CA

Double, 2007| Acrylic on canvas| 72″ x 60″| Collection of the artist

Next Post: https://oss.adm.ntu.edu.sg/ytan149/foundation-2d-my-line-is-emo/