"Oh So Smart" 2007

A break from the Firebird stuff for a while, and may be a bit of whimsy.*

*You may have noticed my dislike of the term "whimsy". I have often used it as something derogatory, (like nostalgia) which I believe may be the result of my art school training (whimsy is frowned down upon in art school, as well as anime). For me, whimsy is: 1960s French children with balloons, modern interpretations of early 20th century puppet shows and circuses (excluding freak shows), tulips, puppies, ladybugs,

butter flies, and Rococco art. HOWEVER whimsy can be good. I remember a discussion about whether "Amelie" is whimsical. Maybe. I'm inclined to say "Yes", and would say it's good whimsy. "The Science of Sleep"= whimsical, maybe taking it a bit far, but still good. Jane Austen? Sure. Frank Capra. Certainly. If you hate whimsy, you'll say that it refers to something devoid of deeper "drama"/"meaning", but in its defense, I say that good whimsy in fact does address these "higher" emotions. Like you'll see...

(To the left is Fragonard: ugh, killer whimsy)

You sign up for this class "Arts in Cinema" and what do you think it will be about? My thought: cinematography, color, character development, story-telling, acting, writing, etc. But no go; it was apparently about subject matter/themes, primarily regarding abuse/rape of women, (female) nudity, and sex. Kinda creepy. And I could have taught the class, since I had seen almost everything the professor mentioned. Maybe one day. (Oh, and supposedly only "true" Hitchcock fans have seen "Lifeboat".) But whatever. I said "screw that" and worked with what I preferred (those things listed above). I was a senior and didn't give a damn what the teacher wanted anymore. As long as I looked like I knew what direction I was headed, the teacher's didn't stand in my way anymore.* So I focused on story (something I rarely deal with anyway) by working with some of my favorite movies: "Harvey" (1950), "The Philadelphia Story" (1940), "It's a Wonderful Life" (1946) and "The Haunting" (1963) (<-- a definite outlier). If I had more time, I would have moved into "The Thin Man" (more Jimmy Stewart).

*Which is the secret to art school. People often say: "I always liked art, but when I went to art school, they were dictators and they shook it out of me." Get past the first two years, then if you have a focus, the professors will recognize this and help you out.


"Oh So Smart, or Oh So Pleasant"

"Years ago my mother used to say to me, she'd say, 'In this world, Elwood, you must be' - she always called me Elwood - 'In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant.' Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. You may quote me."

Of course, this is from "Harvey." Jimmy Stewart as Elwood P. Dowd, friend of Harvey, a Pookah. But I really don't need to give a synopsis (though disappointingly, I don't think anyone in my class had seen the film, or rather, any film from before 1975).
As I've mentioned in an earlier post, I have a collection of old postcards, and I used to use them as a backdrop in pieces. But as I attempt to move away from the 2-dimensionality of my earlier pieces,* I've begun using images more as patterns. With these pieces though, I returned to my roots, taking it a step further in this one even. The postcard image is like the backdrop on a stage, but it's on a freestanding stage, not inside a building. I moved away from the "box-construction" format, and made more of an "object". There's a disagreement as to whether it's totally frontal (the natural format for a postcard) or a 3-dimensional object. So the image: The Mercer County Courthouse, in some unknown small town at an unknown date, with a horse-drawn buggy. On the back is written, in pencil:
Dear Lottie: Glad to hear you was a going to school and did not think you could sew as well so well as to make your gown. So of course you can help your mom a good deal when you are out of school. The weather is fine now. Write soon. [Aunt Martha].
I didn't choose the picture because of the reverse text, but because it reminded me of the architecture from the movie, and (to take it literally), because it is black and white (well, green and white). (And by the way, "you was a going"?! It's like she's joking!)

The tall post on the right is reminiscent of a lamppost, which is of course where Elwood was first introduced to Harvey. But it also has a surreal, sci-fi, flying-saucer-like shape that fits in with, well, the whole pookah thing. It towers above the rest of the scene, makes you look up if you were to scale with the scene, something like the poster. The lamplight/sunlight streams down, creating a pool at the ground. It's an ochre colored, sandy pool, the dirt from perhaps it grew (?). To the left is a rectangle filled with some kind of grasslike material. Like wheat, maybe? Wheat: maybe it's pre-bread, showing generosity (he always invited people for dinner). Or maybe it's ore-alcohol (it's implied that he was a notorious tippler). But also, it's next in the progression from earth to grass. And to the left is a third rectangle filled with tiny black balls. Something like buckshot (violence? hunting rabbits?), but then "shots" could also mean an injection/medicine. Which could also refer to the sanitarium where Dowd was taken. It's cold hard reality, physics, atoms, electrons--"science". And it's a progression from earth, to plants, to manufactured. Or minerals. The piece is standing on screws and nails which are uneven, something like legs walking, making it 3-dimensional, bringing the theoretical, fantasy world into reality. There is a projecting piece with a round hollow. It implies a void (a wormhole? a black hole?) and again the light rays. It's the part that implies time, makes physical empty space, makes the object-ness of the piece questionable again, because it refers to the theoretical. To something that's not physically there.

So: the piece adheres to the plot, but also speaks to fantasy, the unknown, something yes whimsical, but by looking "up" at that thing towering overhead (a warm light source) there is the implication of something higher. It points both upwards, but also downwards. It would seem that there are some "serious" references to spirituality in the piece, and also in the story itself, something beyond straight-up whimsy. It's different from other pieces I have done, because of its "story", but it steered away from the story, almost by itself, to an area my pieces often occupy: metaphysics, theories, fantasy, and that place between familiarity and unfamiliarity.

*Attention to background is one of the reasons I consider myself more of a painter than a sculptor.