4/12/2006

Min Kim

35 comments:

Painter said...

Min Kim @
ATM gallery
511 west 20th street new york, ny 10011
And
619 west 27th street new york, ny 10001

zipthwung said...

Is there a diffrence between illustation and FIne Art anymore?

I think so.

rainbowandskull said...

Her piece in the Greater NY show was really great. Not as illustrative.

triple diesel said...

Zip, I think the difference is just context/venue. I've seen Vik Muniz fashion collages in NYT magazine, and Chris Ware comics in the Whitney.

JD said...

I find the big-eyed manga-looking girls too cutesy; hard to see in this jpeg. A bit too illustrative for me. . .

art animal said...

too illustrative for me as well. but I love the glisten in the eyes.

no-where-man said...

It is all about funding – hense venue. Everyone has their panties in a knot over Barney right now. He a 'film maker' showing 'movie props' bitch Art Critics. He is punishing his captive audience - work belongs in a gallery not movie theaters I have heard film critics mention, - yet the overwhelming appeal is irrefutable people love him he is a huge hit in both again with fans in all fields, and I am not even touching fashion or commercial Art here.

And Matthew Barney's avant-garde "Drawing Restraint 9," his collaboration with paramour Bjork that is being distributed by IFC Films, continued to have powerful if not universal appeal in its second weekend. It averaged $8,422 at three theaters.

Y is MoMA getting corporate? Y did MoMA have to expand and now the Whitney to keep up? You do the math. Who’s ‘job’ is it to fund Art anyways? You want the government involved? Do the rich have a responsibility to ‘culture’, is the Art out there now adding to ‘culture’? trust no-one.
Maybe some weird hybrid thing is on the cusp out side of venues now, as Artists need increasing funding to meet cost of living in the city and as funding continues to come from different more diverse venues. Maybe that’s good.

burrito brother said...

I like Kim a lot better than Barney. Which was her piece in GNY? The deer? That was a nice piece...

rainbowandskull said...

http://artnet.com/Magazine/people/laster/laster3-25-22.asp

Her and her piece at GNY.

burrito brother said...

huh. don't remember that one. kinda nice tho. sort of reminds me of kurt lightner. meets ben butler, but more cartoon-y. she should do whole room installations.

fairy butler said...

i'm a fan of her work. yes, it's precious and stylish and illustrative - sometimes this is a problem? whatever. but with her work i am on board. her images are just compelling and the way they are made is so perfect/beguiling. I can get lost looking at these (in person more than jpg, of course).

burrito brother said...

yeah, the Billy Sullivan looks a lot more 'illustrational' to me. 10 years ago, you couldn't give one of his away with a cup of coffee, now suddenly he's michelangelo?

zipthwung said...

Reminds me of the green man myth, although I descend from the Picts not the Tonkin.

Vic Muniz reminds me of the bean portrait I had to do in undergrad.

I enjoy the Chris Ware comics in the NYT mag sometimes - I never have enough cash to buy comics though...

bada said...

Matthew Barney annoys me, but I love bjork...hmmmm...anyone hear the soundrack? it's, uh, interesting. (I don't think bjork drew much restraint for that one...not that it's bad.)

I think galleries are like record companies they just take in whoever they think will be in for a moment, make some $, then spit them out later. I think they call them one hit wonders...

being illustrative can make money and sell, sure, but as an artist can you feel valid at the end of the day? possibly, I guess...I couldn't do it...not to mention how many frikkin illustrator types you then be compared to and up against...and you think there are a lot of found-objects sculptors...ha!

about the work...um...I like the leaves...

operation enduring artist said...

people often comment that my work "looks like illustration". ok...so? Min Kims work looks like illustration too. ...so? visual language is visual language...a tool in which to express ideas and feelings. i personaly think that the 'visual language' of illustration democratic in its ability to shrug pretention and speak to (or be able to be read by) many.

now, the pitfall is that illustration is often pleasing to look at and is very surface oriented. to transcend illustration and cross into 'art' one needs to create an experience in which the audience can experience and/or formulate an idea, it must be able to stand on its own...illustration is dependent on the thing in which it is illustrating. im not sure that Kims work stands on its own in relation to idea, however, maybe the context this painting needs is other of Kims paintings... the image in this painting is void of context...its an isolated figure on a white ground...

wow, what did i just spin,,,,,

dubz said...

i don't think it's the technique or composition that makes it look like illustration, it's the way it functions as an image----it's the kind of suspenseful and forced narrative that book illustrations have--the formal quality of a child's imagination with a faint allegorical quality and promise of a twisted yet happy ending. can't get into it.

no-where-man said...

love the DR9 soundtrack & Bjork, but the combo itself not exactly mind blowing kinda reminded me of her with cunningham, or Nan,
didn't mean to bring that up in the context of this post, - rather just the idea of 'context' and its power. the fact that i have heard the criticisms from both industries so much over the last few weeks that i have been re-thinking my dogma about 'illustrative' and the relationship between an Artists 'Art' and 'other work' say 'illustration' - where would you say the line is for Warhol? i saw a great exhibit at corcoran that had alot of his 'illustrations' in them - and the heart of them - gold leaf, boys did all inform his later work... where is the line?

mr.wakeup said...

warhol was an illustrator; dekooning was an illustrator and designer; and jasper johns (and i believe rauschenberg) did commercial work/windows and all had a technical skill/craft to create their vision.

if only fine artists had that craft ability and then 'let go' to create their vision... most can barely draw ... many illustrators fall into this catagory as well...

no-where-man said...

and rosenquist was a billboard painter, i have watched him demo blending it is mind blowing.

and i notice all these artists you mention day jobs afforded them the ability to practice their craft through out the day, as a skill building day job.
Could the lack of ‘craft ability’ in fine art right now relate to the lack of day jobs in such fields that were available for these Artists you have mentioned?

Certainly those disgraceful printed on tarps that flake ads across city blocks these days don’t hold a stick to those in say the 80's. Whole face of the city is plastic now. I always marvel at the hand painted ones when I see them, the few left in soho and one across penn are always noteworthy. the gap betten high and base art.

mr.wakeup said...

i absolutely agree... it is the lack of craft and perhaps,vision; perhaps struggle/life experience etc,,,

in the 60s fewer artists were educated in the Arts and the circles were so much smaller to get your work seen... it slowly has become an industry by which there is an overwhelming number of 'artists' graduating with poor skills..only the more talented/visionary in all the Arts survive... the sad thing is- now one has to have marketing skill and overt determination to get anywhere... at least van gogh had theo to help him out; today the artist has to weed through the industry to be seen(even if having gone to an MFA program)... and hopefully(!)they are one of the truly talented (and not bogged down by student loans)

zipthwung said...

Look online. Thousands of people are drwing porn and monsters, people and places. They are happy doing it and get peer recognition and so on and so forth.

There are lots of jobs (still!) for people who can draw.

Only the visionary and talented show in Chelsea though,right?

Most people imitate and repeat what they imitated with subtle variations.

Imitation the way to make money - something artists are criticized for not doing, but in the end whos making the cool shit? Its usually not the guy doing the Excell spreadsheets.

Some of my favorite work was pretty easy. You could say its a culmination of hard work, but I'd examine that idea - it smacks of Puritanical Calvinism or something.

I often dislike work that looks self consciously casual.....

mr.wakeup said...

I don't disagree with you at all zipthwung... as far as i'm concerned if one can make a living creating art of any sort; i congratulate them, especially if they are happy.

no-where-man said...

i would argue that the hand crafted, in commercial society is increasingly replaced by the machine, i think more people drew in the 70's then made spread sheets, it is sad i miss the human touch in the day to day.

operation enduring artist said...

you can all rest your heads on the hand made that is:

http://jacobgoble.blogspot.com

wod zar xam said...

I don;t know if illustration is theproblem here. Mostly, I don't like this one because of its strong genre affiliation. It looks like anime fantasy art and does not push the boundaries at all. In my opinion, when you stick to genre to closely, you lose any hope of transcendence or discovery, and cannot effect a viewer in any way other than to recall the successes and failures of that genre.

Some artists have played with anime successfully - Takashi Murakami of course, and Chiho Aoshima is one of my favorites. But what they did is use the genre to talk about greater issues, or use the genre as a jumping off point to create pieces of sufficient complexity and physical grandiosity that it becomes art.

I'm not saying all of Min Kim's art is like that, but this one really doesn't seem to push the envelope at all. It is a picture of a fairy under leaves, and is drawn with a style that seems all too familiar to the subject matter.

zipthwung said...

Yeah genre - Swamp thing, Princess Mononoke, the Celtic green man (as I mentioned)

Most if not all things can be grouped into genres...

becomes more about timing...

bada said...

this is from the billy sullivan thread, just thought I'd continue this here...

from goble: murakami is very clear in his intention (along with Nara). have you all read the superflat? read the essays in the superflat catalogue, it explains their relation to pop japanese culture and what they are trying to say with their paintings and sculptures. they DO have a clear statement/reason. i often get the feeling that many contemporary U.S painters are just passive with their aesthetic...just using it for its Hip factor.

Much of anime is a direct descendant of traditional asian ink paintings...like zip said, There are lots of cartoonists out there who are not called cartoonists. well in asia, or from asia, they can be called traditional painters. lol.

...so this makes kim, well, more relavent in this style at least, than the US "hipsters".

But it can be unclear how an artist comes upon this "style" of anime type paintings...for instance, I studied zen painting for quite a while, and inevitably my work started looking very anime. Had less to do with pop influence than my own personal pursuits. This is an unfortunate coincidence. A similar thing can happen with other asian artists.

however, murakami is addressing this style directly, and I believe was one of the first to do this in the "fine art world". Kim is a much later artist. From info online, it seems she's trying to address issues of innocence and... this style, which she may have come upon coincidently, I think, compliments her query... does she address innocence in this image, given her intent?

Hungry Hyaena said...

Let's please give the "illustration" versus "fine art" nit-pick fest a rest. Isn't is irrelevant by now? It just amounts to pretentious navel gazing and everyone wrapped up in this conversation - including me at the moment - is wasting time. Meanwhile, any number of artists - illustrators, painters, animators, sculptors, whatever medium, baby - are making what they feel compelled to make and not worrying about bullsh*t Art World constructs or dying modernist imperatives.

Sure, dismiss something because you don't like it, but get over this stupid "illustration" or "art" divide. In another decade, the theory folks will find it all so quaint and infantile.

bada said...

...this is not so much whether "I like it or don't like it" and more whether someone finds it interesting or not. If your work is not interesting, that is a far worse situation than if it is not liked.

I think the illustration vs art is a very relevant issue with art today, and many critics/art historians will agree... it's more about commerce+globalization vs. art and craft vs. content. These weren't really issues of the past, they're distinctly issues of the now. of course, while you're going through it, the degree of relevance issues are difficult to guage...but I think not talking about whatever possible issues there might be would be a mistake.

Everybody who really does art knows that in the end you do whatever you are compelled to do... when you're talking about art, it's a wholly different act. It's then about having a conversation to understand what's going on, then, well, going on. We are not writing on this blog to go on, we do that in our studios.

With this in mind, if you don't feel what's being talked about is relevant, than instead of trying to shut others up, ADD to the conversation, bring up the issues you do think are relevant... this is what makes an open forum like worthwhile for everybody, and, daresay, art.

this goes for a lot of other lurkers...if you don't like what's being said, say something. why not? As much as I love to read what goble, no-where-man, zip are saying... it would be great to hear from others also.

am glad you spoke up, tho, hyaena. feel free to say more...

Hungry Hyaena said...

Bada:

It wasn't my intent so much to "shut others up," but rather to spew a little invective and read the ensuing fireworks. Surprisingly, there was no response, excepting your own.

I agree with your distinction b/n writing and art making, but, at the end of the day, all art "criticism" is reduced to the very subjective, "I know what I like." I don't see anyway around that. Sure, it's more important for your work to be interesting, intelligent, well crafted, etc, than well liked, but each viewer decides what is interesting to them.

And as for the "illustration" vs. "fine art" line: Yeah, a lot of critics/art historians would agree, but only those so firmly entrenched in the Art World proper (the East Coast Art World, at that) that they don't notice, or apparently comprehend, the sweeping changes around them. It just ain't right to wear the blinders if you're building something up or tearing something down - passing judgment, I suppose.

A quick look at the Los Angeles or San Francisco art scenes reveals how very different the coasts' respective approaches are. Here, we're busy hand wringing about "illustration," and, across the continent, they've embraced, absorbed and individually reworked myriad graphic influences, any one of which our ivory tower dunderheads would eagerly label "illustration" or "kitsch."

wod zar xam said...

What is it that separates illustration from art? I don't think it is a "look" so much as a lack of scope that makes a work illustrative.

Illustration, almost by definition, takes an idea outside itself and depicts it. Art, in my mind, generates the idea while depicting it. Illustration is a process of rephrasing, art is a process of creation. That is my take on it anyway.

Hungry Hyaena said...

Wod Zar Xam:

Well said! Using this definition, though, much of what the current Art World dismisses as illustration doesn't qualify. Comic books, cartoons, graffiti and the like, for example. While some artists working in these modes may depict ideas from outside, a great deal do not.

More importantly, again using this definition, so much conceptual installation is purely illustrative. Think of the ranks of young artists limning ideas from Deleuze, Guttari, Paglia, and any number of other contemporary philosophers/social theorists (and more classical thinkers currently in vogue, like Hegel or Schopenhauer). The artist statements and press releases associated with this sort of work are didactic and usually only reiterate, or offer abstract summations of, the sources' ideas.

Not that I find fault with this - though, more often than not, it's f'in boring if you know the the texts - but it must be deemed illustration.

kelli said...

This was one of those things you had to see in person.They were really fragile andsensitive and lovely. In jpeg they just look like yet another rip-off of japanimation.

Adi said...

Find Internet Marketing resource hare Online Marketing Strategy | Internet Marketing Tools | Online Marketing Campaign | Online Marketing Business | Online Marketing System | Online Business | Online Home Business | Online Business Tips | Internet Marketing Online

Adi said...

Oes Tsetnoc one of the ways in which we can learn seo besides Mengembalikan Jati Diri Bangsa. By participating in the Oes Tsetnoc or Mengembalikan Jati Diri Bangsa we can improve our seo skills. To find more information about Oest Tsetnoc please visit my Oes Tsetnoc pages. And to find more information about Mengembalikan Jati Diri Bangsa please visit my Mengembalikan Jati Diri Bangsa pages. Thank you So much.
Oes Tsetnoc | Semangat Mengembalikan Jati Diri Bangsa