Chris Trueman describes his current body of work as a way of exploring a long-standing interest in the difference between the physiological process of sight and the psychological facet of perception. He is fascinated by the way people interpret visual spaces, extract meaning and build narratives from their perceptions.
In the words of Chris Trueman:
[caption id="attachment_9235" align="alignleft" width="600"]
Art by Chris Trueman 72" x 72"[/caption]
"My paintings fuse various styles, gestures, marks and methods of paint application onto the same surface, mixing them with diverse sources from art history and references to popular culture.
Fundamentally, the paintings search out and explore the limitations of parallel processing within our perception. Parallel processing encompasses the ability of our brains to process simultaneous stimuli. In everyday vision the brain processes and analyzes color, motion, shape and depth. Together this set of characteristics is compared to stored memories to identify what we are looking at. Not so long ago, scientists and theoreticians speculated that exposure to technologies such as the Internet and mobile communications would help our brains develop the ability to simultaneously digest multiple sets of parallel processes. Recent research has found that this has not happened. Rather, we are learning to switch trains of thought more quickly and to find connections in a greater number of ways.
I am taking advantage of both aspects by constructing paintings that can not be processed at once; they are intended to remain multiplicitous, and refuse resolution into one unified object. When first viewing the artwork, the viewer’s eyes follow lines, shapes or compositional elements. As one moves through the painting the changes between styles are integrated into a common space, allowing the viewer to slip between styles.
[caption id="attachment_9236" align="alignleft" width="550"]
Art by Chris Trueman 46" x 36"[/caption]
By the time the viewer realizes they are no longer looking at the same style, they are following another modality.
As I construct the paintings I work with each style or methodology as a system of ideas revolving around a set of formal devices. By sampling from diverse sources, I am able to tap into a familiarity and cultural memory. I mix color, style and art historical references from hard edge abstraction, architectural rendering, abstract expressionism, pop art, manga, Los Angeles flow painting, and representational painting. I can undermine the essential logic by which each school operates, clashing the appearance and behavior of each system. The finished painting is an irresolvable space that fluidly changes systems of thought as each system begins to contradict its own logic, resulting in greater clarity of the differences between the various systems.
We will be featuring Chris in a solo exhibition in the month of October. Be sure to see his work in person at TW Fine Art!
Written by
What appears to be a sculptural structure made of simple styrofoam cubes littered with food scraps and tennis balls, is actually a carefully crafted sculpture of imitation.
We live in a world of imitation - a Louis Vuitton bag in the store may be copied in some backwater factory and sold on the street for a small fraction of the price of the 'original' sold in the store.
It's our business to take a high value artwork and reproduce it in a limited edition print that is essentially a replica - only it costs almost nothing compared to the original. To the undescerning eye the copy is as good as the original, it feels the same, weighs the same, looks the same - so isn't it essentially the same? What makes one item more valuable than the other? Duchamp offers a theory - that is one of context; if a run of the mill bottle rack is turned upside down and placed in a Gallery, it is more valuable than the exact same bottle rack that you have sitting in the garage.
It's an interesting philosophical question that makes you question the way we assign value to objects. Why do we value one thing more than another, even if they appear exactly the same?
I remember being quite taken with some sculptures by Jeff Koons. The pieces were these inflatable pool sculptures that seemed to float around Sonnabend Gallery when they were exhibited in 2003. I was totally convinced that they were appropriated plastic blow up toys until I touched one. They looked like plastic toys, the only difference was that they were cold to the touch - not plastic at all, rather exact replicas cast out of aluminum & steel. He reversed the Louis Vuitton scenario - making a mass produced $5.00 pool toy into a multi million dollar work of art.
Matson seems to be playing with the same ideas. In this sculpture she has taken rather utilitarian items, like styrofoam cubes and created hand made replicas, stacking them into a sculptural formation as if they were the real thing about to be carved out. She has then hand made scraps of discarded food like banana peels (from paper) and imitation tennis balls and thrown them atop the sculpture like preciously disregarded trash. Its quite a commentary on the precious verses the utilitarian - like Koons, something rather benign and valueless has been converted into art.
This line of thinking is very relevant to our lives at the moment. Mass production techniques have elevated the copy to a state of almost perfect imitation. Retailers have cottoned on to the idea, designers like Stella McCartney not only cater to the exclusive one off, but make high quality garments that can be massed produced through better production capabilities and offer them through other retailers at a fraction of the price of the items in her stores. Just as good as the high end thing - for most of us? I think so.
Matson & Koons reverse this thinking and the result is fascinating. Visit Michelle's website to view more of her amazing work.
