Sunday, May 31, 2009

Sheperd vs. The Phantom


First of all, I am inspired by both the Phantom and Shepard in different ways. I have crossed paths with both and know a bit about both artist backgrounds.

Second, I, too, am an artist, and this is from a broad perspective in this lifetime that I have experienced art. It runs through every fiber of my life, but humbly, no more than any other persons, and proudly, no less either.


I would not condemn nor defend either artist or approach or perspective. I don’t feel that this debate is new or unique to these two and it deals with the greater human struggle at large, which is why I am sounding off on it.


The world of advertising has been using the free form of human expression almost immediately after the former was concepted. I took a stand at an early age in my use of public property as a “canvas” to express myself that I would adhere to certain principles encoded in my psyche by the behavior of those in my surroundings that I looked up to and were mentored by. This codification of my behavior is commonly considered “rebel” or “outlaw” to use general terms on a societal level.


Specifically, I would remain anonymous, for mainly legal reasons, but also to drive the mystique that we are everywhere, cannot be silenced by silencing one, and are part of an ancient struggle to fight a yolk of domination and what I personally considered oppression. And, above all, it heightened my senses to participate in this behavior and to know that there were others who had come before me that I would not know, but I would be mimicking nonetheless. So, it was clear that I was generally unoriginal and anonymous, but, in my own head and close circle I was merciless and proficient.
I began painting and writing and traveling and networking and learning. Almost immediately I came upon artists who had a sense of art that was more academically developed and supported than mine. I chose crime over patronage, because crime was available first, and because patronage seemed like another form of domination. I was never certain of the latter, it was just a personal feeling and it was strong enough so as I never sought it. Since it was a feeling and not a fact, I was able to not hate on others for seeking recompense in the open art world. I would meet others who not only sought it, but, excelled at its advantages. In other words, profited.
And this was a source of many mixed feelings over the years. The term “sell out” can come easily to people in my situation, but after a while, I got to wonder, how much of it is envy and a feeling of helplessness that I had caste myself forever on a losing side.


In the world of the art student, there is the teacher and the critic. It is a world of constant flux, student becomes critic according to, or influenced by, his teachers and the critics that agree with his outlook at the time. They then become aligned with lineages of thought on what is moral, ethical, qualitative and decent in terms of quality of expression. We are all familiar with this struggle, it is what is proffered here, in this blog, and in this debate which has led to a symbolic challenge of one credibility over another. Both artists have demonstrated a sense of connection to people who are contemporary and sometimes even marginal in their past approaches to art, both in its execution and its appreciation. Shepard has been diligent in his campaigns, and although when I first saw them I rolled my eyes and figured it was an art student with a screen press making stickers and posters, I did like the image and its general tone. That he has blossomed so profoundly and so successfully I have to admit is admirable and somewhat contentious with my personal belief and perspective, but more because it is a different approach, and not because it lacked credibility, or that there was a corporate payoff at the end of its rainbow, which it would most definitely seem there is.
Instead, it simply isn’t my personal perspective which is tainted by the fact that I have never received or audited a grant, school, museum, patron, rock band, politician, or even corporation or trust, there of, for sponsorship.

An astute observer would immediately surmise that my approach has cut me off from the connection to the masses that these two artists enjoy and command by selectively receiving and using to their advantage this offered support which has garnered an immediate and profound social effect in their art being culturally incorporated. My approach would seem minimal and flawed in its attempt to make any difference at all in comparison.

The New York scene that offered Basquiat and Haring, as well as Seen and Crash, easily affected both these artists in a very conscious and direct way. And all sorts of “street” artists are part of this lineage that comes into this modern day now and frames this debate. These are all people that we know and can reference, as well as many others who have crossed from anonymity and into a promotional stance for the sake of artistic credence or profit or both. But, untold and unnoticed, are the artists who never stepped into the limelight, never made a deal, never “showed” and never took a class or put their “name” on their work. In my humble opinion, these artists are a much a part of this debate and as relevant by their absence from it as these two are by being at the center of this storm.

Is it legal to infringe on copyrights? No. Is it ethical to take tribal, social and anonymous artistic expressions and make websites, commercials, album covers, clothing lines, profits from them? Well, it gets murky, because its all about can you prove I did what to who cannot be counted, is no longer here and fuck them anyway cause I got mine and every nut for himself. I mean to bask in this modern false swagger mentality about who is more street, when it seems once you accept patronage of any sort you are, accepting, on some level, help from the instrument of your domination and your message about promoting rights and recognition of the “street” you are supposedly “from” becomes somewhat incredulous and you are essentially just a student who has learned from a teacher and become critic.

This is where I live by my sword and die by it as well. If I had kept to myself, my credibility would be completely intact among what’s left of my “street” collective family. But since they are fewer and further between every day, lately, I find myself alone and on the internet. A student who chose a path that didn’t involve a lot of criticism, but more action. And while no one is wearing my logo on a shirt and a good amount of the last 20 years I spent in and out of prison and on the run for my efforts to practice my art outside of patronage and completely anonymous, upholding my personal code in the bargain, I have not had the immediate and profound impact that would spark debate as these two artists have had.

You see, at the end of the day, I can’t criticize no artist for robbery, cuz I have done what I had to do outside the law to get what I felt I needed. There is a price to be paid and I am grateful to be alive and have enough fingers to punch keys right now. A lot of fools that were rebellious outlaw artists outside the realm of schools and critics and debate and profit are not this lucky. So, I wince in pain and remember them, as I read about the travails of these “popular” artists, who I do admire and respect, because expression is valid to me in any form or level it comes in.

The man whose photo was co-opted for Obama has an axe to grind, but didn’t he get paid for his photo once already? And wasn’t it altered beyond the aspiration that he received that pay for? Did Warhol ever have to pay Campbell’s? I don’t know, but it seems there might be a legal precedent there, end of argument for me. If he’s got to pay, he’s got to pay, let the court sort it out. Why do you have to protest an artists show? Shepard did a nice gesture promoting a politician that I believe he truly felt was gonna make a difference. He does, however, represent a company that has branded his art and mass produces it for profit as well as posters for politicians that save the world. It’s a shrewd maneuver, and again, I find myself unable to fault him for that. And yes, I do seem to feel that its valid that his efforts get the attention in the arena that they are getting them in, vis a vie academically sanction gallery world exposure. Why not? It doesn’t seem any more unethical than any other presentation.


On the other hand, I wouldn’t want to be critical of those that want to express their feelings about it being unethical. Protest, sling insults, hurl bad sentiment. Blog, fuck girls that have Obey stickers in their bedroom and run piss over their toothbrushes while you use their bathroom afterwards if it makes you feel better. Make videos of burning, all Spit style, like you learned from watching Wild Style. Call people “toys” and puff out your chest. Claim you have more street cred for whatever reason, but, as a cautionary note, remember, there is a difference between criticism, teaching and action. I am not gonna say criticism is worthless, like I used to, because I am learning to be a little more accepting these days and be a participant at this late point in life, critical as it may seem. All I know for sure, if I am not being creative, I feel like a tool, worst feeling in the world, and, obviously, I am learning to express my criticism, somewhat, in run on sentences on the internet. Creative criticism, we’ll call it. For the youth out there getting involved in this debate, just a word of advice from an old outlaw, careful about giving yourself too completely to one side against another in war, they may truce it up one day and you’ll still be fighting for an ideal that has been compromised or abandoned, as it was someone else’s artistic point, not your own, and they used the reaction of your youth to prove it, sold a bunch of shirts and dvd’s and got a grant and spent it and moved on. And your still there, holding on to an ideal that would have been better served working it out on the walls and trains and modern canvas in your mind’s eye than on a blog spot or a protest line. I wouldn’t dare speak to silence, but don’t OBEY when you don’t have to. Creation. Through thievery or destruction if you feel it’s necessary in your gut, but not because any critic tells you to.

Sometimes its better to just make life beautiful and walk away, without a parade or fanfare. That carries more “cred” than anything I have come across in all the ghettos, squats, riots, train yards, tenements, prisons, internment camps, shanty towns, famines or torture chambers that I have been in.


When it comes to big “king” fights like this, I tend to retrovert to the old Godzilla-Rodan formula. Let em’ take each other out and maybe the humble one will win and bury themselves under the polar cap until the American remake.


No comments:

Post a Comment