The Struggle To Right Oneself: On Artists’ Statements

Art critics, especially good ones, are fond of saying that there are few forms of writing less creative than art criticism, that groping struggle to hang heavy, awkward words on the ethereal and ineffable. Each time I’ve tried my hand at writing critically about art I’ve empathized with this despair. But one part of the process always bucks me up and gives me faith in the necessity of the writing: reading artists’ statements.

Below even badly translated technical manuals, arcane government regulations, and most poetry, artists’ statements may be the most oppressively awful literary genre in existence. With a uniformity that is almost shocking, they follow a forkless path on the way to pretensiousness and inscrutability: invocation of an obscure, usually gloomy, Philiosopher followed by a fuzzy-headed description of the themes that infuse both the Philosopher’s work and the artist’s that takes the form of broad platitudes and near meaningless phrases which sound more like the titles of interdisciplinary graduate school classes than the description of any actual physical objects: Embodiedness and Globalization in the Decline of Nature and Aboriginal Identity, etc. Next comes the self-mythologizing section: an explanation of how they gained a profound personal undertanding of all these broad themes only when they travlled to rural Borneo to the deathbed of their long lost twin. Finally, they finish up with an actual, if vague, description of the work (‘by taking pictures of cats, I. . .’) and a precisely described, if imaginary, projection of its effect on the world (‘. . .will inevitably bring greater attention to the crisis in the region’).

The truly maddening thing is that the excreableness of these statements is completely uncoupled from the quality of the work they describe. Less horrible statements can describe inane work and the most baroquely kafka-esque of them can describe work with a simple and direct power.

A great, maybe quintessential, example of this is Kerry Skarbakka’s artist’s statement about his series titled The Struggle to Right Oneself. I will try not to put you through too much of Skarbakka’s statement, but to give you a taste, it starts:

Philosopher Martin Heidegger described human existence as a process of perpetual falling, and it is the responsibility of each individual to catch ourselves from our own uncertainty. This unsettling prognosis of life informs my present body of work

And ends with this:

The images stand as ominous messages and reminders that we are all vulnerable to losing our footing and grasp. Moreover, they convey the primal qualities of the human condition as a precarious balancing act between the struggle against our desire to survive and our fantasy to transcend our humanness.

Now, like you (and Skarbakka himself, most probably), I have no idea what this means. I don’t know much about Heidegger and I can’t even parse all of the dangling prepositions in that second excerpt into a gramatically meaningful unit (the balancing act is between the struggle and the fantasy but the struggle is also against the desire and all of this is somehow the primal qualities of the human condition as the balancing act?).

Beyond this question of bad writing, though, Skarbakka’s statement completely misses the point of his work, which is, largely, light and playful in tone. Take, for example, Naked:

naked
At first, you see the captured action itself: bouncing on the bed. His raised left leg and back-tilted head emphasize the arc of his flight and give you a strong feeling of downward motion back towards the bed.

But then something strange happens. The body seems to settle into place in mid-air. It becomes a kind of classical sculpture. Rather than a single moment stolen out of an ongoing process, the poze is eternal, general. The shadows it throws on the wall and bed from the direct lighting make the body pop off of the rest of the background increasing this illusion of its three dimensional solidity. Like a bronze, it seems heavy, but at rest.

Often times, Skarbakka makes this joke of the flying body as sculpture all but literal, like in Fence, where the figure balances impossibly on the tip of one toe like a plastic pink flamingo in a garden pushed almost all the way over by the wind:

fence

or in Studio which catches the artist in a permament Wiley Coyote moment, after the edge of the cliff, but before the fall. Where, in true cartoon logic, the only thing that can cause the fall is the realization, which will never come to this frozen figure, that you’re walking (or, here, lying) on air:

studio

Skarbakka does also have a dark side, which is equally misrepresented by the existential moanings of his statement. Images like Sarajevo (left) and Hopkins (Belize), of bodies falling from rundown buildings in third world countries, in a post September 11th world:

sarajevowater tower

These pictures resonate strongly with the television news footage of people jumping to their deaths to escape fires on the high floors of the World Trade Center towers — one of the central images of our often apocalyptic-seeming times. Although Skarbakka has, under political pressure, explicitly foresworn any such connection, this seems like an especially rich area for him. If he can bring his understanding of frozen moments of falling, and even his sense of humor about them, to bear on this horrific possibility of contemporary life he would really have acheived something of the depth and profundity at which the muddled words of his artist’s statement can only hint.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

This entry was posted in Art. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to The Struggle To Right Oneself: On Artists’ Statements

  1. Mikey says:

    Have you ever written an artist statement? I think it’d be interesting to read one you wrote after reading this.
    I bookmarked this a while back:
    http://www.nonstarvingartists.com/SitePages/Document.2004-07-10.1865503281
    A guide to writing an artist statement by Lisa Radon.

  2. Greg says:

    I’ve never actually had to write an artist’s statement myself, but I have had to do the obligatory, ‘What is this work about?’, talk in studio classes and I’ve helped other people work on their statements. My tack tends to be highly specific and concrete. For most artist’s I’ve met, the reason they made something is usually more like ‘I wanted to see the shiny thing next to the furry thing’ than ‘to protest the racial disparities that result from global warming’. That second type of thing is mostly the result of art education and practice since the sixties which requires artists to be hyper-verbal about their work, I think.

  3. Lucie says:

    I consider myself fairly ignorant about art and likewise about what makes good art criticism… but I thoroughly enjoyed reading this.

  4. Mikey says:

    When I read an artist statement, I want to end up feeling like I understand the work more. In considering our own potential collaboration, I don’t know what I would want to say to people viewing it. Would my own feelings muddle the experience for others?
    Usually if I see an artist statement, I’ll look at the pieces first, and then read it.

  5. Molly says:

    If you find the relationship between Karbakka’s statement and work disjointed, it’s not the statement that’s at fault. In theory, the statement should come first since that is the intent. I myself find them to be very clear in their relationship. I also see the last two images here as being linked to both Heidegger’s statement about “…the primal qualities of the human condition as a precarious balancing act between the struggle against our desire to survive and our fantasy to transcend our humanness”, and the apocalyptic imagery from 9/11. According to Susan Sontag in her book ‘Regarding the Pain of Others’, one reason that we are so seduced by images of war and violence is out of an abstract desire to transcend our present states of being, our “humanness”.
    Also, it’s tough to call someone out on their misspellings when someone misspells things themselves.

  6. Umbral says:

    as an artist myself, I see the artist statement as a necessary evil. on the one hand, some work stands alone as a single piece. on the other some pieces only work as part of a body of work made of several pieces. the artist statement helps curators, grant writers, and the general public understand work that is intentionally vague or subtle. it’s not the viewer’s fault if they don’t get it. much like writing short story, which I also do, the artist has to create a subtext that rises from the “not said.” with that, i have to say that i could care less about spelling and grammar, although important, i care more about what the artist statement implies. i also feel that it should be readily apparent to the reader what the artist is trying to say. fancy vocabulary or jargon only serves to ostracize the ignorant and further divide the “elites” from the real world.

  7. jess says:

    Interesting pictures!!

  8. Anonymous says:

    nice

  9. mera says:

    you are not meat!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *