Jax Art History 2
20 April 2008
20 CommentsA brief personal history of the Jacksonville Art Scene by Morrison Pierce.
Home » Jax Art History
20 April 2008 20 Comments
20 April 2008 20 Comments
20 April 2008 20 CommentsA brief personal history of the Jacksonville Art Scene by Morrison Pierce.
Morrison asked me about the title of the series. Thought maybe it wasn’t appropriate and I explained to him the concept behind it.
The Jacksonville art scene for some reason or another I feel isn’t very proud. I thought if we did this series and focused on where we have come from and where we are going we can try and establish some pride in the scene.
And maybe in a year we can archive this series with twenty or so interviews. Getting as many folks input as possible. take what has taken place and eventually establish a path for getting where we need to go.
anyways. that’s the concept behind the name. I’m open to new name suggestions though if you really can’t stand the title. It’s just a title too so no worries. What’s in a name?
this was fun Morrison. Nice hearing your story. If anyone is interested in doing one of these let’s get together and I can do one with ya next weekend.
part two of Mark Creegan coming up soon.
Art scenes are created by young people. I think the problem is the young artists here are not very good. At least the ones that don’t leave or don’t come back. Before you rush to judgment, let me explain. Our city doesn’t have much in the way of art education. I’m not talking about schools, I’m talking about a way of life. I was in my 20’s before I knew what a Picasso looked like and I don’t think I was a rare case. I should have been in my Basquiat stage at 15 not 25. Let’s take a city like New York, because we are all familiar with it, if you grow up in NYC, by thirteen you’ve seen more art than most adult artists here. Artists here are at a sever learning disadvantage. I know Mark and Morrison very well (the last two artists interviewed). They are both doing their best work now. The type of work that would be accepted in a major art market. If either one of them had grown up in an art city, they would have reached this point in their early-twenties. Unfortunately it took them until their mid-thirties to find their voice. Now it’s too late. Now they both have families (Mark is married and Morrison has a son) and they both have other responsibilities that keep them from creating an art scene here. By the time the young people are done doing skateboard art they have lost the energy to fight for an art scene. They become like me, old and grouchy. Art stars are made before they turn thirty.
It’s a young man’s game. The clock is ticking.
kurt you put the nail on the head i guess i can’t tell everyone i am 27 anymore.
I went to Wolfson here in Jacksonville and was well aware of all the major players in art history by my junior year. Now the kids at Douglas Anderson I’m sure have a much better background with art history than I did.
I do think the understanding of art history or lack there of is a huge issue in our city arts. We might have some really interesting art here in Jacksonville but without understanding what has been made in the past the Jacksonville public has a hard time of understanding what should be made in the present.
So I think our public sort of shapes or defines what art is here in town regardless of what type of work us, the artist, are making. I don’t believe art is a young man’s game really anymore. I’ve heard of a lot of artists who don’t get their break until their forties.
And then there is the Grandma Moses example. She wasn’t “discovered” until her eighties.
I don’t agree Byron. I think the artists shape the art not the public. Your point about D.A. is a good one, but I was talking about the so called “regular kids at regular schools”. I would like to know which artist you refer to that are breaking in their forties. I would think that they probably got their break earlier and we just didn’t hear of them until later, besides their is always a few exceptions to the rule. I’ve read so many articles about dealers snatching up artist right out of school, or some even still in school. Of course those schools are not in Caveville.
Fabrice Marcolini, a big time international dealer in Toronto, once told me “the art always starts with the artist”.
I was referring to one specific artist in particular, John Currin.
http://the-artists.org/artist/John_Currin.html
He didn’t get his big solo show in Chelsea that made him the art star that he is until he was 40.
There are tons of examples I’m sure.
There is no one way things are done. Some people never get discovered. And that’s fine. It should always be about the art anyways.
To have these types of conversations about there only being one way things happen is simply just not true. There are so many ways things work. The universe opens up at the strangest times for people. When they least expect it. And sometimes it just never happens.
And in Jacksonville what I was saying is that the public does define art. I mean of course the artists should be leading the way defining it for them but that’s not how it works here.
In other cities where folks are surrounded by the arts and culture the artists define it for them. But here we need to educate the public so we can define art and not have them defining it for us. That’s the problem. Not enough arts education of the average Joe, not the artists. I mean it’s our job to know what it’s all about. But if the average Joe doesn’t have a clue then we might as well be whistling Dixie.
So I think we are saying almost the same thing, but a different way. Maybe? Maybe not. I’m happy to agree to disagree also
I agree Byron that the reasons for our non-art scene is more complex than just one reason. I think though, that the lack of a cohesive young group of artist, that are talented is a huge problem. I also think that our city is not alone. Artists struggle everywhere.
I guess also, when I talk about a break, or art star, somehow I think in relation to our city, not to the world. Like, Zach getting in the show at J. Johnson - that was a big deal.
Here’s another thought and maybe one that can be talked about more broadly. “Why should anyone care about contemporary art”? Sometimes
I struggle with this question. Sometimes the question hinges only on my art, but the question still remains. Do you think you could post that question? I’d be interested in seeing some answers.
next time i will try harder to make no sense whatever
good question Kurt. I’d like to take the first attempt at answering that by asking, “Why should anyone care about sports?”
And then of course that’s a hard one to answer too.
To me… art of the time is a reflection of our culture that shows the direction that culture is headed. Now that’s completely generalized and such, but that’s what I think New art is. It’s the pulse of the times. The Zeitgeist. The flow of the river so to speak.
So it would behoove society to study the path that it is headed for two reasons:
1.) To not repeat the mistakes of the past
2.) To make the future better than the past.
So that’s my take on it. If society was indeed good students of the direction is was headed, then maybe it could redirect the flow of the river before we are all shot head first off a very high cliff.
Basically what I believe I just said was, culture should study itself in order to try and survive. Art is like a check engine light on one’s dashboard. It can show you how much fuel is in your car, and if you have GPS, where you are headed and if you can get there in time for American Idol
Now why should we be interested in sports? Most likely for very similar reasons. Anyone else?
Like Kurt said, I think this could be its own post. Like Jennifer’s “What is art?” and Rachel’s “Why are we artists?” on the SPACE site. The way I would answer the question is with another question (or two). Why not? Or, Why care about contemporary music? Or contemporary literature? Or contemporary theatre/cinema? It’s art–one of the greatest things we can do as humans, setting us apart from other animals. It is an original form of creation (visual, optic, and now other things) illustrating our complex character as homo sapiens. As for contemporary…it is the art of your lifetime. The art that most directly applies to you. The art you can probably see before it ages, or gets lost with history, or burned, or declared obscene and censored.
cool Kelly. feel free to post it.
art is blasphemy in todays time they the audience are caught up in a cat and mouse game with the gas pump the mortgage collector the kids and the spouse
to dream of a better place we are already living in hell
heaven is the afterlife when consumption doesn’t matter
I sometimes wonder if those interested in contemporary art are a different breed. NOT better, just different. This comes from a generalized and casual sociological observation of things like contemporary artists are among the first to like and seek out new music. And visa versa with some musicians. There seems to be a thirst for new experiences and ideas to get ourselves out of “normality”. I think most contemporary artists abhor the normative lifestyle, or at least some aspects of it.
EVERYTHING I HAVE SEEN HERE IS NORMAL WHEN IT COMES TO ART WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE POPESTER AND MARK CREEGAN WE ARE STILL PAINTING ON CANVAS OR PAPER
SOUND DESIGN HAS BECOME MY NEW MEDIUM
not to be defensive or what not, but art doesn’t have to be shit in a can to be contemporary art. it’s the concept behind the art that counts.
that’s why i’m sticking to my drawings. drawing to me is the purest art form around. it’s back to basics. it’s primordial. caveman.
just because something is on paper or on canvas doesn’t mean it has to be normal. just my take on it.
i mean all of it’s relative. just as long as it makes you think.
i agree Byron, its all relative and dependent on context. you put any work in a different context it may seem “radical” or “normal” depending on the place and other work around it.
i do love some poop in a can art though. for snizel. i don’t think that work has to be stretching the definition of what art is. art has been pretty well defined throughout the years.
the way I see it, it’s up to us to take the tools at hand to deliver a message. to make folks think. if that is accomplished with the tools at hand then the work is successful. it shouldn’t make a difference what the tools are.
oil painting is just as legitimate as it was five hundred years ago. maybe even more so today because rarely anyone knows how to use the medium. i think the same goes for drawing.
I like your answer Kelly. I also think Byron has a point. Things don’t have to be new to be unique and things don’t have to unique to be good.
I also think sports, music and cinema can be more relevant and do reflect the zeitgeist a lot better than painting, sculpture, etc.
The main reasons are sports and the rest are much more communal. They’re also a lot easier to understand (with the exception of Morrison’s noise band) and quite frankly, the more people like something the more people will like it. If that makes sense?
I never had a show at Pedestrian either. Most of the time
I hung my work in the bathroom if it was up at all.
Every time I put one there I sold the piece over the toilet. Positioning
is everything.
scared rabbits is not a noise band. experimental terror
Leave your response!
Subscribe in a reader
Blogroll
Recent Comments
Archives
JaxCAL SPACE Videos :: Most Recent
Find more videos like this on JaxCAL SPACE
Recent Posts
Most Commented
Globatron.org
The alter ego of contemporary art.Chief Contributors Include:
Mark Creegan / Morrison Pierce / James Greene / Akbar Lightning / MonKevtheModern / Byron King (Founder)
A sounding board for developing contemporary art and culture founded in Jacksonville, Florida.