Working within the Dual Existence Creationism Philosophy

My work involves much experimentation. I explore my philosophy with images in many different ways by employing many different methods. Some methods are time consuming while others involve a process of creating in a rapid succession of images. All are used for the same purpose; to dissect, influence, and counter the image through thought and instinctive creativity or automatism (the supports image).

These processes and the choices made during them can evolve to a point of extreme minimalism, extreme complexity, or anywhere in between. Hours of work can at times be reduced to a single pattern on a blank canvas whereas a more complex work may be completed in thirty minutes.

The test of each image is the same. The minimal and the complex go through the same scrutiny and each will ultimately be inadvertently labeled as either an aesthetic or anti-aesthetic image. This label is issued and becomes more defined or blurred by the number of people that view it. The purchase price of an image does not determine its label. For example, art institutions are filled with many images, some of which are anti-aesthetic. These are the images that receive eyeball rolls from the general viewing public. The public display of that image is the way by which the image becomes anti-aesthetic. This same image would remain an aesthetic image if it were only viewed by those that understood the purpose for which it was created. Instead, the general public that views the image will ultimately outnumber the elite viewing community and the label will shift. The institution therefore by having more general viewing aesthetic works than general viewing anti-aesthetic works will inadvertently perpetuate this label by attracting more viewers. Shock art is a faux aesthetic in that it may be repulsive to the general viewing public, but it also attracts the general viewing public because of its repulsiveness.

There is great difficulty in creating an image that is comparable to the Pure Aesthetic. The existence of the Pure Aesthetic creates polar opposite images that are theoretically possible. One pole reflects the possibility of creating such an image that would be genuinely liked by every viewer that would have the means to view it. The other pole reflects the possibility of creating such an image that would be truly disliked by every viewer that would ever have the means to view it. The ability to create work that is genuinely liked by every viewer is the dream of many artists. The ability to create a work that would be genuinely disliked by every viewer is one that most artists generally wish to avoid. I am uncertain, but generally believe that either of these images would be impossible to achieve. This has brought the following questions to mind and I attempt to answer them with my work.

1. Is a True Aesthetic or Pure Anti-Aesthetic image possible? If so, would they take the form of one individual image like the Pure Aesthetic or come in many forms?
2. To what end will the artist be capable of creating the pure anti-aesthetic image? An artist “feels” the aesthetic image is complete but is it possible for the artist to feel an appropriate incompleteness of a work?
3. Is the support capable of having an anti-aesthetic predetermined image? If it is not, then is a pure anti-aesthetic image, using traditional materials, even possible?
4. Is the artist destroying by creating an anti-aesthetic image even though he has not created an image to destroy?
5. Is every artist really just destroying by creating an image on a blank support; The Pure Aesthetic?
6. Is it possible to create and destroy at the same time?
7. Will an image of this type become genuinely liked with time due to the realization of its purpose and changes in aesthetic taste?
8. Can an artist resist the urge to create an image of interest or beauty in creating an anti-aesthetic image?
9. Is it possible to predict the effect the image will have on every viewer that sees it?
10. Is it possible to receive an honest opinion from every viewer of the image? What is the gauge that determines like versus appreciation?
11. What part does an artist’s reputation, personality, character, sex, and ethnicity play in determining the viewer’s opinion?

I work to discover a formula for creating Pure Beauty (a true aesthetic) and True Repulsiveness (a pure anti-aesthetic). This is theoretically possible but has yet to be accomplished. My work is a record of my move toward this formula. My work varies in style in order to prove or disprove the questions I have concerning the development of this formula. I am currently exploring the viability of traditional mediums for this purpose. I already recognize that the difficulty in creating an anti-aesthetic image is countering my need to create an aesthetic image. Any step during the process of creating an anti-aesthetic image is capable of unintentionally creating an aesthetic image.

The closest I can think of to attaining this would possibly be achieved outside of established artist mediums by using a medium conducive to repulsiveness. These materials would more than likely be organic and would involve senses other than sight. An unpreserved dead animal might be a possible example of an anti-aesthetic sculpture. However the change in decomposition would play a large part in this and the smell would overpower the visual affect of the work. The viewer would need to hold their nose to get the effect necessary. Contemporary or (Shock Art) has created a market for this type of image already. This image cannot therefore be considered an anti-aesthetic image. Besides this, the sculpture would decompose to the point of nonexistence, therefore losing its identity as a work of art.

I am not against using any material in my search; however I would like to explore it in traditional mediums first. I believe this to be the most difficult medium in which to search for the imagery described in this philosophy.

Working within the Dual Existence Creationism Philosophy

MonstroUrban

North Richland Hills, United States

  • Artist
    Notes

Artist's Description

This is my statement about working within the DECBQM philosophy. I have posted it to allow better explanation of my philosophy. I really appreciate your interest and hope you comment on it in one way or the other. This is the basis of my creative output and my hope is that it will inspire others to test its merits and work within it. I hope it has not bored many of its readers.

desktop tablet-landscape content-width tablet-portrait workstream-4-across phone-landscape phone-portrait
desktop tablet-landscape content-width tablet-portrait workstream-4-across phone-landscape phone-portrait

10% off

for joining the Redbubble mailing list

Receive exclusive deals and awesome artist news and content right to your inbox. Free for your convenience.