wherein i write about 2 of may favorite painters

Two of my favorite painters both live in New York but have very different mentalities about image making. Brian Rutenberg comes as pretty and decorative as they can while still somehow being realistic, creative and abstract. Peter Maslow's work is urban and sketchy, dingy and raw yet both artists have many similarities that put them on the same team, using like-minded processes to get very different results.

If you want to know about Brian Rutenberg it’s all out there. Just go to youtube and watch some of his studio visits; he gets really deep into who he is, how he feels and why he does what he does. Explained succinctly and directly he is educated with a capital E, and ready to paint. He has been making art forever and has had a very successful career. Much of what you would want to know about him as an artist is on the internet, like a Tom Brokaw of his own inner-world of image making, reporting a lot (too much?) from begin to end. I watch these every day and I always learn something new about art and the south and New York and how to be a good person (another damn smiley face emoticon from me, when will these go away by the way?).

Peter Maslow? Not so much with the youtube. There is a video someone made a long time ago about him but the vids are broken up into tiny chunks for some reason and we only get a glimpse into his world but it’s enough for me. All I want to know is where he is from, how hard he works, and the rest is in the paintings. I got to say Peter is my favorite painter ever. His work comes from a love of drawing, de Kooning, and the colors are bruised and urban and quite scary but contrasts extremely well with all the other art ever made. I would never want to paint the way he does but his process comes from a very personal place; the 1980s, subways, architecture, Polish landscapes, graffiti, and a New York most of us can’t deal with. The colorful gallery friendly slick thick oil paintings of Brian’s aim to please in the best of ways but I prefer a blue-collar goombah’s paintings any day.

Both artists received Fulbrights (Brian in 1997 and Peter in 1999) both went to odd Euro lands with the prizes (Ireland and Poland, respectively) and both came back from those experiences changed forever. Brian came back and went deeper into an atmospheric, hazy environ while Peter came back and saw dark greens and flak towers, yes, flak towers, where soldiers fought and killed from the tops of during WWII. In my mind, it gets no darker in painting than a flak tower but the city can also hold the same fear for me; anything can happen in a small, crowded city/apartment and often does. There are a million stories and all that. Peter’s color scheme leaves me quite sad, but he is working from a place he knows all too well and the hard work he knows first-hand on a daily basis (he is a contractor by trade) shows up in his giant pieces. His works are constructed, patiently, with experience, like buildings, with a direct architecture that is loose but still solid as rock. There is only one way out in Peter’s worlds and that is to fight up and over on a daily basis. If this is the type of person you are, and you practice over a long period of time putting that kind of effort in your paintings, it will no doubt show up there and be good. It’s hard to explain exactly how and why this is but a trained art eye will spot it in a second; Peter is a master artist who fought hard and long over many years to get to the bottom of the work he is making and it’s all paid off.

So my heart is with Peter, but my brain says Brian is on equal footing though in a decidedly different way. A career as a professional artist also requires a path few can handle; the art world is super tough with fragile egos and monster trend swings that will dismay and confuse any human. Brian has navigated this for decades and that strength comes from a specific place that is beautiful, wrought with an eccentric and scarred history, but always satisfies in the end. Brian’s art seems to come from everything natural like weather and water and a love of everything art history has to offer. Much painting today is made this way; a mish mash of styles and techniques and only the best of the best can make it all work together in a painting. Believe me when I say that Brian’s way of painting is very difficult and requires everything of an artist. Brian also represents a southern way of thinking; extremely odd but honest and humorous and loyal, maybe to a fault. Peter on the other hand represents a worker of the highest order; someone who could build or fix anything, and build it perfectly, efficiently and somewhat happily and with supreme confidence. South and north ya’ll, there is still a difference.

Both artists make total use of fictive space in an original and unique way developing super imaginative worlds that you can get very lost in. This results in highly personal and unique paintings. One is coming from nature and the other from the city (and some nature). Both guys are large dudes and both are trustworthy, honest, for the good and hard working. Both in my opinion have forged their own paths in a world and history of men and women dead set on being exactly who they are and not much more (see Americans, Abstract Expressionism, etc.) and magically wrangling that vision into a singular way of image making. Maybe they have not changed the world of painting but they have pushed it forward, even if just a small bit and that is enough. 

http://petermaslow.net/paintings/

http://brianrutenbergart.com/studio/paintings.html

Carl Smith’s second solo show at Little Pink Monster Gallery 2015

Carl Smith’s second solo show at Little Pink Monster Gallery ran for a little over a week. The show had around nineteen pieces on view, mostly abstract paintings on canvas and some smaller works on paper. About one-third of the show was paintings made with mostly spray paint. The largest was a spray-painted sixty-five inch square work on canvas and this one had a different, perhaps better sense of scale and execution than the other works. Some of these spray-painted works edged closer to pure abstraction but still missed in my opinion.

It’s hard to say whether or not the show was good. I mean there were some good works in the show and some were clunkers of course, but mostly I saw an artist struggling for a voice and searching for a unique way to make paintings. Landscape is about has simple a point of reference has you can get but can also be a template for exploring bigger artistic ideas. This seems to be the case with Carl. I wrote this in my last review, I’ll say it again; I think Carl is on the path to finding a voice but is not quite there.

I think the art world is full of very weird ideas about how art should be made. Artists are sometimes lazy and occasionally lie about how good their art is and how much it is worth. For all of Carl’s faults I will say he is attempting to be honest about who he is and where he is in his development. And I must say I find this refreshing. This behavior ensures nothing but could lead to something and if it does it will be hard won and earned.

Another positive in this show was the sales prices. Nothing is more annoying than an artist who overvalues themselves and their work and has absolutely no reservations expressing this in the sales price of their art. Please, seriously consider if your art is good, artists. Is it really worth thousands and thousands of dollars? Please keep in mind the world is watching and art history is brutal.

I am not surprised to see few people taking on the challenge of abstract painting but the ones who do seem to fall into a life of mystery and confusion searching for and dealing with the true meaning of creation. Humans are probably not meant to know the entire truth about creation. What would humans do with that information? If politicians could create planets would they use that power for good? I have my doubts, but if you do decide to paint and try to find a voice in that you can rest assured you probably won’t get too far in life. If you are lucky, really lucky, you will push painting forward a tiny bit but you will be judged for it and you will be excruciatingly questioned and ostracized.

Also, know that if you do find a voice you will probably get very far away from being able to make a dollar. I have not worked out the math on this but I know there is a correlation between how creative you are and how unlikely it will be that you will be able to make money. Paint breasts, cattle, and longhorns but by no means try to be yourself unless you want to live alone in a world of pain. You’ll make few friends and decrease the odds you’ll sell art to people who are mostly looking for ease and comfort in their imagery.

The artists that lie about their abilities and hide their limitations will always win the day. The artists that claim to be gods when they are not will make it difficult for artists with simple goals to survive at the most basic of levels. I see this all the time and nothing makes me sadder than good artists who are honest and kind getting steamrolled by people who can only think in short-term/high-dollar terms.

Hopefully Carl sees a good day in his future with some fairness and empathy.

“Counterpoint Paintings” by Carl Smith at Imagine Art Texas Review by Carl Smith December 2014

“Counterpoint Paintings” by Carl Smith at Imagine Art Austin, Texas

Art Show Review by Carl Smith December 2014

Carl Smith’s first solo show took place not in a gallery, but ... what I think was an artspace? Although there was ample parking and space for the work, when I entered the place, I was not totally sure where exactly I was. No wine. No champagne. Non-alcoholic art openings are not my idea of a fun time. Perhaps Carl is in Alcoholics Anonymous or something. There were snacks, so ... you know ... there's always that.

Anyway, on to the art review. Around sixteen pieces: all painted in series (I will give them that). Most are on canvas, but there are some works on paper (and I was glad to see those framed and matted -- I have been to more than one art show in Austin where the paper works are blowing in the wind whenever the front door opens). The sizes are standard and not too large with the biggest around six foot square and the smallest down to a two foot square.

The title of the show was “Counterpoint Paintings” and there was some wordy over explained description on the wall of what that meant, but I had art to look at so I skipped that stuff. It was nice to see some red dots -- meaning some works actually sold (which seems to be necessary if an artist is going to make any attempts to produce more work).

All the titles make references to “Counterpoint” so the works are essentially untitled. The bigger pieces are the weakest in the show. The materials used look like the kind of stuff you would use to paint a cinder block in your garden. There are some interesting contrasts between the spray paint, glitter and acrylic paint, but I did not see completely developed compositions. I am not sure how long Carl has been painting, but he may not be ready for the bigger stuff yet. Seeing the low quality of the paint used across a big surface emphasizes the acrylic paint’s cheapness, and makes the work and style unconvincing.

His 3x3 pieces are a little closer to what you would want to see in abstract art. Carl seems to be right in the early stages of putting together a style. His colors are bright and every piece has pink in it, which gives the works a light, pastel quality. He more often uses the cheaper quality paint along with spray paint to make the background forms, and there is almost none of the real luminosity to the colors that you would find in a standard oil painting. None of the works at the show were varnished, but I doubt that would help Carl’s case anyway.

Some of the smaller 2x2 pieces look better, and show a talent for drawing but the background forms seemed rushed together. The line work has more of a deeper darker color palette and higher quality of paint, and there is a sense of improvisation to some of the works. But this still does not make for consistent high quality image making. There are pretty, standard references to abstract-expressionism in these works and maybe even abstract landscape painting (though even those influences are not really pulled off all that effectively).

Abstract painting went out of fashion in the 1970s, so what does it really mean to be an abstract painter in 2014? It probably means consistent whining on Facebook about not selling enough art & I note that Carl does have a Facebook page for such whining. A building of confidence would go a long way in Carl’s game and hopefully this is in his future.

All in all, some of the work shows promise, and I think if Carl logs in ten or so more years, then we might see more interesting work. This critic will stay tuned and hope for the best.

online art interview 12.2014 with Carl Smith

Self taught or art school? 

Self taught, I have taken some night classes around Austin though and I took all the public school art classes I could. I studied Accounting in college and have worked for the IRS since 2007.

If you could own one work of art what would it be? 

Probably a mid 1970s de Kooning; one of his landscapes. Untitled XII from 1975 is my favorite painting, ever. There is also Rosy-Fingered Dawn at Louse Point, that was a little earlier. One of those.

How would you describe your style? 

Abstract landscapes. I am influenced by abstract expressionism a lot, but I am trying to get away from the aggressive mark making and just paint. All my work comes from a landscape position and a practice of making those.

What are your favourite places to view art? 

I live in Austin, so there aren’t to many places to see art so I try to go to my friend’s art shows when I can. The internet is a great way to get exposed to new imagery, of course its limited but I do my best. Houston is great, the Menil collection rules and the Art Car Museum always has good shows.

Who are your favourite artists and why? 

So there is this dude in Brooklyn Peter Maslow who makes these weird abstract urban landscape type works. His paintings make sense and are constructed logically and intentionally. He also draws well and somehow gets that into the work but not in a forceful way. The colors are toned down a lot but his art makes sense. I mean, he’s not an old master but his paintings have helped me a lot to make sense of the paintings I am trying to make. I like artists like that; that don’t hide their limitations or their feelings. Basquiat is another one. De Kooning of course.

What or who inspires your art? 

I think its wanting to feel empowered or make sense of my limited life. Painting has helped me come to terms with what I am and has helped me to have a place to be myself. So I try to get inspired by the work I have made and I try to work in a way that pushes forward what I am capable of. I have a good idea of what I can not do, and that’s a huge list, but I try to own my limitations and live within them.

Where’s your studio and what’s it like? 

In 2008 I built a 8x12’ studio to paint in about 30 feet from the back of my main house, which is really small, like 830 sq ft or something. It’s a small space which sucks but I really can do anything in there without worrying about making a mess. That has become a big part of my process and I have found trouble trying to paint anywhere else. It has taken years to set it up so I can use it all quickly.

Do you have any studio rituals? 

Nope, I just go in and go for it. I am always under the gun time wise so I just get as much done as I can before I have to go back to work again. Its really messy.

What are you working on currently? 

I am using spray paint a lot more, mostly like an under painting and using the contrast of that to brush stroke to create some color perspective. 

Where can we buy your art? 

My website is carlmsith29.wix.com/arts but Facebook works better. I show all around Austin but am looking for more internet sales always.

What are your ambitions?

Somehow get to the place where I can paint full time. I am always trying to get better as a painter and learn more about composing an image. Its all about composition.

Farrell Brickhouse: Recent Paintings at Life on Mars Gallery NYC

Farrell Brickhouse: Recent Paintings at Life on Mars Gallery

Farrell Brickhouse might have one of the best names for a painter ever. His recent show of paintings and prints is understated yet bold. The buildup of paint and understated complexity of his compositions lull and charm you into a friendly yet kind world full of lush brushstrokes and beautiful images.

His surfaces are built up in very unique ways through a multi-layering of thick oil paint and many repeated passes over a long period of time. A process this timely might become lost on new generations of painters who do everything fast and then faster. He also seems to find the most interesting surfaces to paint on. Glitter is used on almost all the pieces, while never overused.

The oil paint used in these pieces hold light in place and do a lot of the work for the painter. One of his builder series pieces has blocks of color built inches off the canvas. A strange mouse hangs out and away from the surface standing next to a vertical Tetris of colored squares. The build up toward the bottom of the piece helps give more gravity and volume to the work. I am convinced these pieces would not look good on a grand scale and Farrell has learned to use these smaller spaces confidently and humbly.

“Guys Moving Wood II” is a painting where the title says it all. This is my favorite piece in the show and it reminds me of a video game where guys grouped in threes and fours happily carry brown rectangles back and forth across a muted background. This piece is musical and rhythmic in a way that is emblematic of a painter who loves painting and celebrates his subjects with joy.

Little feet hang from the top of the piece and though it is a horizontal piece, it references a vertical continuation of the subjects. Some of the men have little hats which I love. Saying these are cute should not belittle Farrell’s efforts; art can be many things at once.

Like many abstract painters who reference recognizable subjects in their work, Farrell has developed a language system very much his own.  His way of painting looks childlike at first but draws you in as you see only a skilled painter could.

Abstract Expressionism showed a large and emotional way of image making that was necessary at the time but may not be so true now. How Farrell could make these small works look so convincing makes me rethink what successful painting is.

It’s great to see late career painters revitalizing their careers via social media outlets. Facebook is turning out to be a new tool for artists and this may be the sad future for them. Gallerists also are going to have to use these new outlets to promote themselves to sell their work. Self-advocacy won’t get easier for artists but will become absolutely necessary and may hopefully shift the art world centers away from places where there is little economic diversity.

Brian Rutenberg “Saltwater” Forum Gallery, N.Y.C. Art Review 10.30.2014

Brian Rutenberg “Saltwater” Forum Gallery, N.Y.C. Art Review   10.30.2014-12.06.2014

Enveloped in color, these pieces draw you into a unique world. The back and forth of light and shadow suck you straight to the back of these works and leave you cold and wet. Then you get shot back to the front where it is gray and dry. Your brain is kind of mush as the reality of what a landscape can be melts and shifts your gaze forcing you to see the world in an entirely new way. These works also reference a tradition of painstaking artistry that takes decades to wrangle and also includes a disciplined study of centuries of art history. The colors can’t be bought anywhere; they can only be mixed and applied craftily through repeated mistakes, patience, practice and repetition. These works show what some of the most difficult types of work there are look like; the kind that asks everything of your heart and your brain. 

A repeating pattern I see in some of the works is a buildup of foreground information to the far right of the pieces. This forced me to view the piece from right to left instead of the usual left to right (one should assume Brian is right-handed). This lead to a kind of reading backwards that helped me reset my view.

“Rivulet” seems to bend from right to left in this way and has a feel of mid-evening. The south is a weird place and the Carolinas seem to have a very diverse range of nature shapes and colors. Is there any other part of the country that has this feel and diversity of plant and color life? Perhaps, but probably not, serious observation of one place and true love of that place has to go into a convincing artistic representation of it. The obsessing over how to say what is being said here does not come to life in that old 10,000 hour-rule adage.

“Mint Light” is the springiest of the works; mostly green but then purple at the bottom. Tons of yellow light peek through the trees then fade back toward right-center. If there are leaves here they are squared off as sections of colored data. The ground comes up from the left and the horizon line could be where the trees meet the ground or could be higher. Abstraction and realism collide head on in a way that satisfies and also confuses if you are looking for the usual friendly hints that occupy most landscape paintings. This is what good painting is; taking things that are old like painting and landscapes and using new techniques and fearless experimentation to present art in a new way.

“Spell” is a five foot vertical piece that pulls you back, and I mean way back from the front of the piece. The piece has just a couple of shots of yellow near the top left that shed light over the whole blueness of the piece. The heavy bottom juts out and it is sometimes difficult to determine what a tree is and what a shadow is. Like in cubism, both a shaded and a light side seem to exist in the same vertical plane. Then here they fade back as your eye goes up and away into the piece.

I am partial to the horizontal pieces and “Fringetree” has a beautiful slanting horizon line. The colors here are totally obsessed over. Some are purely saturated but then gradated and blended up and down. The bottom of this piece seems to be more in the middle and a gradation from the bottom left using purples and pinks gives the whole thing a sense of fog and displacement.

“Clover” has a milky atmospheric top and just under that to the right center are orange blades of grass (?) that dance around for about two-thirds of the piece. This has more of a definite bottom and a solid left side with black and reds that help to define the foreground. This part contrasts perfectly the way a landscape does and has a satisfying not overworked quality.

These pieces for me embody a very unique way to paint; one that looks backward to a long history of using everything possible to make a convincing piece of art. It also looks back to a history of abstraction in painting that is still figuring itself out and seeks relevancy in a world dominated by technological advances. But these pieces have everything you want in a painting and an art form: color, confidence, composition and a process that is complicated, unique and hard fought for over a long period of time. Yes, these pieces are highly decorative but also possess a dedication and perseverance needed to make good paintings that stand alone, stand the test of time and find a place in the history of painting making.

Please go to

http://forumgallery.com/exhibition/brian-rutenberg-saltwater-october-30-december-6-2014/

to see the paintings. Forum also has a new eyeglass viewer to look at detailed parts of the pieces.

“About Thirteen Hundred People, About One Hundred Rocks, and Thirty More People” Drawings and sculpture by Russell Etchen

“About Thirteen Hundred People, About One Hundred Rocks, and Thirty More People”

Drawings and sculpture by Russell Etchen

Friday, September 19, 2014
Test Tube at Tillery Park
801 Tillery Street, Austin, TX USA

So yeah, when someone draws little heads, I kinda think, uh, not much of it initially. I went to see what was up with this show anyway. Glasstire put this show in their top five for the week so I was thinking there would be three hundred or so people there. I was glad when there was not. My very old nose and eyes can only take so many crooked hats, fat laces and weird hipster smells. 

The Test Tube space is about 8X16’, I think. There were not a ton of pieces on view but that had nothing to do with the space. I found a perfect amount and variety of works. The space is well constructed but small. I had no clue what the noise was coming from inside the space but there was some. The hanging paper heads threw me off but what really got me were the drawings. I mean, really, I liked these. They were made with care and love and color. They were also presented in real frames with real glass and real beveled edge cut matte boards, which in Austin seems hard to come by these days.

Again, I was not expecting to be into these. I prefer big weird paintings that look like nothing real and also look completely obsessed over but I was happy to find real art in these works. Having to seek the art in these works made me happy when I found it. Me inaccurately thinking art would not be in these works taught me something important; I am often a dumb ass about a great many things.

Art is weird. Artists are bat-shit crazies. I think they have to be. They also have to be dedicated and endure the many piles of crap life throws at them. I think Austin is blessed to have Russell here. He is determined and honest and works hard.