Xiomara De Oliver@ Deitch ProjectGarden Party Group show
Reminds me of Stella Vine, Kathrine Berhardt,Chantal Joffe, Karen Kilimnik, Karen Heagle
This is terrible...what is the gallery thinking!? Why is it enjoying the spotlight of this blog? There is lots of interesting painting going on ... this has nothing going on.
the figures carry an emotion.
http://deitch.com/projects/project_images.php?slideShowId=273&projId=182The painting at Deitch is a bit different than this one.No Where Man do you work for Deitch?
This artist seems to have developed a fairly genuine and effective language with which to guide a narrative. The work certainly goes beyond being a naive or self-taught/outsider style, which I'd think would be tough to do. I say kudos.
nope. don't work for him at all. but fair amount of paths lead back to. show me 5 years of openings and i will show you a pattern of greatness.
"The work certainly goes beyond being naive..."In what way? Naive and untaught are all it looks like. Shapes, color, paint handling, etc... are all completely void. "effective language" doesn't quite help. (I apologize if you were being sarcastic)
the rendering of the walls.
this person is not a naive untought artist....they are in a show at deitch arent they? plus if you look at her other work it seems apparent that she has chosen this somewhat recognizable visual trope in which to spin her allegorical tales. plus 'untought' seems to be a democratic style doesnt it? to an insider the concious decision to paint in an 'outsider' style seems a bit pretentious maybe? but to the larger universe it can be an efficient way in which to tell a story...that is granted that there is a story to tell and not just a fasion statement.
Goble,"Pretentious" to have an opinion? AndNo one said anything bad about Dietch as a gallery. However, as far as telling an "efficient story," what I am trying to say is that the slapdash nature of the painting is inefficient and distracting...the "how" tells me nothing here. I'll be quiet now.
They are definitely painted in an odd style. The quirkiness is the only thing working for me. Looks like a bunch of old-school hookers. Some kind of comment on the seedy side of sex. The objectification of women. Too bad the paintings really don't push the subject or the paint around. It just sits there for me. Very unimpressive paintings. Sorry De Oliver sex sells but I ai't buying.
chrisjaghad no intentions to shoosh anyone...i was just attempting to keep the conversation out of the 'is this outsider or not' ditch and maybe steer it into some other discussion ditch...narrative ditch? and maybe even the ' what constitutes a narrative' ditch.
Goble,I like your intentions...and you art too. I think your own paintings are more worthy of conversation than this work. Also, I doesn't matter if art is outsider/taught/folk/or otherwise. Ultimately we are all self-taught...and the work is either convincing or not -- I don't care about anything else.
This one seems as though it is trying to shock us into accepting it. Sometimes that is appropriate, like with Bacon where he wove beauty out of brutality. This one seems all shock.
i guess what i get out of this painting is that nothing fits. these women dont seem to fit into the place they are in...the cloths seem costume-like as does the makeup and hair...this hallway reeks and the women reek or artifice, a show, a front, and uncomfort...or maybe i feel the uncomfort of meeting them in this tight hallway.
Yeah Goble I think you are right on, there is a lot of intentional dischord here. The dingy hallway vs. the bright costumes, the somewhat off balance poses... this painting is meant to be unsettling. It reminds me of "The Scream" somewhat, and has a similarity of look to a lot of expressionist art. The more I look at it, the more I like it actually. Its not naive at all, actually seems very planned in terms of composition, pretty effective piece.
we are travis bickle.
I prefer to think of us as a lobster boat.
know it is excessively late to be posting...I think that the most obvious fault I find with this painting is its confused interpretation. I find the women’s' dresses too detailed in contrast with the abstracted alleyway background. They seem to exist in between the stark reality of their cheap lace dresses and shadowy receding background. The juxtaposition of these two elements comes off as disconnected and lacking fluidity. Maybe Oliver could have merged the image a bit more cohesively - the platinum blonde doesn't help. I really admire the alley behind then women but otherwise I am nonplussed by this image
I guess Goble beat me to it - I completley agree. I find this painting completely off-putting (in the mudane sense). however, it seems that the surfaces and textures of the painting have a tangible concept that may not be properly represnted in a jpeg
Reminds me of Barton Fink, in an odd way. Or a strip joint/flop house called the Marble Arch in Vacouver BC. Or any tea stained faux ghetto...Travis Bickle indeed.I was watching the People Under the Stairs (black cast yo) at the bar and this girl (of color) came in and was shilling cigarettes. I answered the survey and got all this free shit. So then this dude mistakes me for a "freelancer" if you know what I mean. Jesus. Carrion CrawlOn Down the hallBut the gellatinous cubeGets the rube.Oh but less about me and more about the painting - not my taste. Too "people of color" and not enough "problem or solution"Power to the people.
Like Iggy said "I felt the luxury of her"Hey women will kick your ass evry time. Because as Maya Deren said--femininity is everything human that is not necessary. and we tcb too.
Post a Comment