Wednesday, July 28, 2010

An open letter to Harrison Keys

Posted by Jessica Blankenship on Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:17 PM

Harrison Keys...shit, man. Why you gotta play with my heart like this? I went to the opening for your show Pressure Luck at Get This! Gallery last Saturday, all atwitter with anticipation—I’ve much enjoyed most of what I’ve seen you do in the past, and I was hungry for more. This was going to be a juicy feast of tasty art goodness, I just knew it. I even skipped dinner. And then you go and leave me feeling empty.

so have more interesting things.
  • so have more interesting things.
Here’s the thing: your show is not bad. The succinct pieces gave the room an easy rhythm—it felt good to be in the gallery, surrounded by your work. It wasn’t until I started having my little tête-à-tête with each piece that I realized I was surrounded by deceptively-seasoned tofu art; it looks like a burger, but it ain’t. Once you get up close, you realize there’s no meat at all. This, Mr. Keys, made me very sad. I’ll explain.

At first, I thought I was pissed because a lot of the pieces appear to invoke the same tired old quarter-life crisis, bittersweet-disappointment-spiked-with-leftover-adolescent-idealism that hipsters have been employing in art for a painfully long time. Which is fine, I guess—we all get amnesty for going through a phase of expressing those feelings, either through bad poetry, bad music, or bad art. It just usually occurs during the days of tidal teenage hormones and biblical acne. But then I realized that it only appears that this is what’s happening. In truth, there’s not damn near enough emotion to even pull that off. After some of the killer shit I’ve seen from you, Harry, I wasn’t expecting these good-looking but disconnected missives of superficiality.

Im feelin the ambiguity too.
  • I'm feelin' the ambiguity too.
So I guess what I’m saying is that you haven’t done anything wrong, Harrison darling. The work in Pressure Luck is clean, vibrant, sometimes (kinda) funny...ya know, it’s got some things going for it. But the whole colorful, line-based, kindergarten-for-grown-ups thing is being done a lot these day—if you are going to make this kind of work, then you are the one who should be doing it better than the rest of the pack. This style doesn’t pack enough technical game for you to not go after our brains. Maybe my expectations were too high, but there’s a fine line between irreverence and irrelevance.

If the technique was going to be (can I say this?) simple, and the design sparse, then the content should have brought the bang. Pared-down paintings of powerful subjects are fantastic. But I wasn’t even demanding power; I would have settled happily for something particularly insightful or clever. And as I made my way from piece to piece, looking for connection, starving for a bit of emotional evocation, I didn’t find it.

no, i am not.
  • no, i am not.

Tags: , ,

Comments (2)

Showing 1-2 of 2

Add a comment

this letter is a bit unfair and undeserved. you never spoke with the artist about this work. yet somehow you expect to decode every piece on your thoughts alone and sum up an artist on your assumptions. you admit to everyone you expected to much, but continue rambling about how it didnt please you.

why not appreciate it for what it is. his work does not claim to be more or less.

report   
Posted by xl2i5 on August 2, 2010 at 11:39 AM

I don't claim that my opinion is any more or any less than that, so why not take it as such?

You're mistaken to say that I make broad conclusions about Mr. Keys as an artist. In fact, I make a point of saying that I enjoy other work he does and consider this to NOT be indicative of him as an artist. I would actually never form a complete judgment about someone based solely on one instance.

I'm getting a kick out of the artist and his friends' focus on the fact that I didn't speak to him. That was deliberate. Not sneaky or cowardly (anyone who knows me or works with me knows I am certainly not those things), but rather a calculated decision to review the work from the viewers' perspective. Many critical writers will do this. Some won't even read an artist statement because what they (and I, in this case) are trying to do is see how the work stands on its own, how it communicates with a viewer--the minute you talk to the artist, his or her perspective and intentions start coloring your viewing experience. you become immediately and irrevocably biased to their point of view. and that's a REPORT, or and interview, or a guided tour of the work--not a critical review.

I respect that you disagree with my opinion, but hey, that's all a review is: one person's opinion. Have different thoughts? Had a different personal experience with the work? Write a review. I hope this at least shed some light on the process.

cheers-
jess

report   
Posted by Jessica Blankenship on August 2, 2010 at 7:25 PM
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-2 of 2

Add a comment

Latest in Culture Surfing

Author Archives

Search Events

Search Culture Surfing

Recent Comments

www.flickr.com
items in Creative Loafing Atlanta More in Creative Loafing Atlanta pool

© 2012 Creative Loafing Atlanta