Pictures of Home

Our Shared Past blends the personal and universal through the prism of family

["It Was Supposed to be Fun." All original images courtesy of Jefree Shalev.]

[“It Was Supposed to be Fun.” All original images courtesy of Jefree Shalev.]

["A Few Years Later," photograph by Carolyn Brass, 2013.]

[“A Few Years Later,” photograph by Carolyn Brass, 2013.]

The phenomenon of memories can be as slippery and ephemeral as the combination of passing time and thought that lifts them into our consciousness. Does every memory that we keep carry with it some importance and resonance? Why will one recollection occupy our lives while others are overlooked, dismissed or forgotten altogether? Refined through the spectrum of our feelings and emotions, the past can bring us joy, resentment, and even mislead us completely. When combined with nostalgia, that seemingly-universal longing for what can no longer be experienced, a remembrance can even turn into a kind of memorial. Nostalgia can be likened to a funeral where time is buried, yet we still insist on revisiting the headstone, in some weird hope of deciphering these memorials of our past.

And if there is an even greater collective resemblance of memory, it is that they are generally tied into relationships; reveries which seem tethered to our connections to lovers, enemies, our own place in the greater universe, and invariably family.

The author Vladimir Nabokov (1899-1977) was no stranger in fusing these types of interpersonal relationships with reminiscence, at times driven by an almost desperate sense of longing and an unflinching use of introspection. Over the course of his 50 year literary career, in novels such as “The Real Life of Sebastian Knight” (1941)  “Pale Fire” (1962) and 1969’s “Ada or Ardor: A Family Chronicle,” Nabokov wrote of characters that seemed troubled by themselves, many times trying to answer life’s riddle with answers pulled from their bonds or detachments with various family members. The Russian-born novelist had this to offer on both our tempestuous and affectionate affair with the past: “I think it is all a matter of love; the more you love a memory the stronger and stranger it becomes.”

The upcoming exhibit Our Shared Past is a unique gathering of 34 artists contemplating the strength, love, and strangeness of memory in original pieces focused on familial bonds. The inception of the project began when local gallery co-owner, curator, and photographer Jefree Shalev sat down and opened a box of over two dozen Super 8 mm home movies that had been tucked away in a box for the past 45 years. Filmed between 1958 and 1967, the films captured Shalev’s family in a variety of common settings: weddings, picnics, holidays, and even documentation of events that appear mundane.

While originally indifferent to this cache of home cinema, Shalev decided to transfer the films to digital. After viewing them in total, he was struck with a myriad of emotions. Shalev then made a total of 175 screen grabs of particular images. The effect of viewing this distillation of family, nostalgia and the shadow play of memory made Shalev wonder if visual artists would be affected by this same experience. Shalev then selected and contacted a group of artists to see if they would be interested in choosing an image, or images, and render their own interpretation of what they saw. Every artist contacted agreed. While Shalev approached a group that collectively worked and created in different capacities, he was looking specifically for those who had expressed a strong interest in figurative work.

The participants for Our Shared Past is an engaging mix of both emerging and established artists that includes Thony Aiuppy, Brianna Angelakis, Jessie Barnes, Mark Creegan, Jim Draper, Overstreet Ducasse, Shannon Estlund, Crystal Floyd, Christina Foard, Mark George, Liz Gibson, Margete Griffin, Rebecca Hoadley, Christie Holechek, Chance Isbell, Jason John, Marcus Kenney, Rachel Levanger, Denise Liberi, Jonathan Lux, Patrick Moser, Dat Nguyen, Madeleine Peck Wagner, Sara Pedigo, Morrison Pierce, Kurt Polkey, Leslie Robison, Tony Rodrigues, Jonathan Shepard, Chip Southworth, Shaun Thurston, Jeff Whipple, Steve Williams, and Tony Wood. Their chosen media runs the gamut from oil painting to video work.

The opening reception for Our Shared Past is held from 5-9 p.m. on Tuesday, Dec. 17 at The Joan Wellhouse and Martin Stein, Sr. Gallery located at The Cummer Museum of Art & Gardens, 829 Riverside Ave., in Riverside. The reception features a cash bar and includes live musical performances by Plumb Honey and Lisa Kelly. The exhibit is on display through May 25, 2014. The museum’s number is (904) 356-6857; their website is cummer.org.

I originally sent out an e-mail to all 34 participating artists to ask if they would be willing to participate. After receiving a confirmation from individual artists, I then e-mailed a questionnaire asking about their involvement in the exhibit. I also offered that any artists who could not make the deadline and wanted to be featured in this story were welcome to send in their answers during the run of the exhibit. In the artists’ answers, I tried to keep their actual responses as verbatim as possible, barring any instances of what could be overt syntactical or grammatical errors.

I also sent a set of questions to Holly Keris, the chief curator at the Cummer Museum of Art & Gardens. I then spoke to Shalev on the afternoon of Friday, Dec. 6. What follows are the transcriptions of those collected interviews, as well as the source images and finished works of each artist.

Holly Keris

Starehouse: How did you hear about Our Shared Past and why did the Cummer Museum of Art & Gardens decide to host the exhibit?

Holly Keris: Jefree brought the concept to my attention and I was really intrigued. Plus, the list of area talent he had assembled to participate was impressive. The Cummer is thrilled to host this exhibition.

S: Factoring in the amount of artists involved, this exhibit seems like a pretty involved and daunting undertaking. Have there been any logistical issues or difficulties in getting this off the ground?

H.K.: Not for us! Jefree did all the coordinating and we coordinated directly with him.

S: What do you personally find intriguing about this exhibit?

H.K.: I love exactly what you describe below: family, memory, etc…most notably I love how this exhibition reinforces the importance of the broader concept of family. Not just the one you are born into, the one to whom you are genetically tied, but the one you choose to create for yourself – the one that involves your friends and your community. It speaks profoundly to the idea that despite differences, we are somehow bound together, whether it is apparent or not on the surface, and that through dialogue and understanding we can come together to form beautiful, strong ties.

S: I asked a similar question of the artists and I am also interested if you had the same experience as the curator. Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience of working on the exhibit, did the curatorial process and looking at the original images and finished work seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your view of the exhibit? H.K.: Looking at some of Jefree’s original images made me think of looking at photos of my parents as children. I still have their senior prom photo (they were high school sweethearts) on my dresser. And I think about the times we would sit and watch slides, not films, of the places they had travelled and of me as a baby. It has reminded me of how happy my parents were together (my father died several years ago at a very young age) and how genuinely joyful I was as a youngster, with a profound sense of adventure, wonder, and glee. It has also caused me to take a second look at all the snapshots I surround myself with throughout my home, and think about how I will look back at these more recent moments in later years.

Jefree Shalev

Starehouse:  I am curious about the basic chronology of the exhibit coming to together. When did you first decide to begin this project; was it within this year?

Jefree Shalev: It was probably about a year and a half ago when I received the actual films from my parents. They really didn’t know what to do with them, they no longer had a projector to show them, so I just said “Let me have the box and I’ll put them on DVD for you.” Then it took several months, believe it or not, to find the right person to do it and for them to finish the task (…) it was quite a lot of footage.

S: How many films were there in total?

J.S.: About 30 reels and they are really kind of short; they’re 8 mm movies so they are five minutes long at best. Some might be longer but for the most part they are about that size. I guess it was during the fall when I transferred them. Before we sent them back to my parents, we decided to watch them (…) and that was the thing. We were kind of unprepared really and were kind of blown away by a lot of different aspects of the experience of watching the films. For one thing, just the images themselves were so incredible, there were so many amazing scenes and the colors, you know from 50 years ago (…) that Kodachrome look was stunning and the outfits the people wore (…) the way that people interacted with cameras back then was so different from the way we do now, where everybody has a camera on their phone. So there is something that really just sucks you into it.

S: Do you think part of that was just that it was a bigger deal back then to have a camera? The technology was just a few decades old and had evolved to the point where people could apply it to their own lives. I know that I am incredibly self-conscious with being photographed. I always try to break into the “Olan Mills Mode” when someone is taking a picture I try to like, tuck in my chin. So do you think they were self-conscious in a different way (…) if that’s the right word (…) when they knew they were being filmed?

J.S.: Well, as I was writing about this for the catalog, it came to me that yes, they were self-conscious, but in a different sort of way. The one thing (…) or at least I see this in it from the vantage point of 50 years later (…) I see that they often waved at the camera. It was a communication. It felt like to me that was almost a communication from them to their future selves. That they knew that one day would come when the films would be developed. It took a long time; you sent them through the mail, they would come back and then you would be delighted at this wink that you gave yourself, you know? It almost has that same effect on us today watching those movies in that they are waving to this future that we are sitting in now.

S: And like you said, everyone has cameras and with the advent of the 80s and video cameras being readily available (…) now it’s almost a mundane reality in a way. Back then it was a more rarefied experience.

J.S.: People now are constantly doing selfies. The idea of doing a selfie in that time period was impossible. You know what I mean?

S: Yeah, and it was a waste of the film. You had a finite amount of actual film (…) even with the old Polaroid cameras; the film was expensive so you wouldn’t waste the film or opportunity.

J.S.: Right.

S: I find it curious in the notes that you sent me, which I appreciate since they gave me some kind of template to work with, that you had said that after watching the film you described how you were “struck by a combination of sadness and delight,” and that the sadness came from a sense of alienation from your family. I’m curious about your use of the word alienation. Was this as much in your head in regard to your feelings or over the years have you become disconnected from your family through geographical distance or even estrangement?

J.S.: Well, for one thing there is a sense of alienation from my family, so yes. And it has almost been a constant since I have become aware of myself as a separate person. That is definitely there. But what was really striking was the lack of connection that I felt to my own self in the films. I was able to see that boy and not feel like that was me. I could see him very objectively; and while my memories of my childhood are such that I would consider it a happy one. I could see that the boy in these movies was not having any fun at all. And that surprised me and I felt sad for him.

S: So why do you think that is? Do you think it was kind of a (…) I mean, were you surprised at that since it is almost a sense of false memory (…) I think memories can definitely be misleading.

J.S.: Right, and part of what this show is about is that and also in the way that images can be used in the same way; they are also misleading and they work almost in the same way as memories. You get a tiny glimpse into something and your mind puts the whole story together for you (…) you see the frame before and you don’t see the frame after it (…) so it is all about the false nature of memory and even a film that seems to capture an event.

S: How does your family feel about their memories and life events being used as a type of inspiration for all of these participating artists? Did you call them and say, “Hey, guess what? I am going to take our home movies and give a group of artists this free reign to interpret them.”

J.S.: My parents are not really “art people.” They don’t really care about it (…) and they also don’t get it. They don’t understand at all why anyone would be interested in these old movies and how you could actually make a show out of this; it’s just unfathomable to them.

S: Are they going to come to the opening reception?

J.S.: Oh yeah. They are going to be here for the reception and for me, that’s the show. The show is a performance piece. Because I just want to see how does a person react, who feels that way (…) I mean, does the art actually impact on them? Are they completely drawn into it or are they completely repulsed by it? What’s going to happen when all of these artists want to talk them and tell them how they interacted with this image and what it meant to them and why they picked it? They might want to know more about what is happening then.

S: You also are a father. After being under family surveillance (laughs) with a Super 8 mm camera, have you also carried on this tradition of documenting your own experience as a parent and the life of your daughter, Vitesse?

J.S.: Not at all.

S: No?

J.S.: No, not at all. First of all, we were pretty poor when I was raising my daughter and we just didn’t have money for frivolity. So yeah, there isn’t a lot of documentation at all. Whatever there is, pretty much her mom did. But we separated early on (…) by the time Vitesse was five, so…

S: Right. In your notes that you sent me, you went on to explain how this sense of detachment, which you have explained provided you with an objectivity in viewing the films (…) gave you a sense of this personal experience is really in some ways universal. I’m curious how this detached or neutral state gave you that specific realization. Was it like a “white light” epiphany or more from a culmination of watching all of the films?

J.S.: It was immediately striking that these images were so strong. It was like, “Oh my god it’s like looking at a painting.” As we were watching them, Carolyn [photographer Carolyn Brass] would take out her camera and start clicking pictures while we were watching the movies. We just thought, “Holy crap, this is incredible.” So many years had passed that I was able to see them almost as these archetypes and not members of my family. I guess that was the thing. When you are seeing somebody from so long ago and I realized that my own daughter is eight years older than my mom was when she had me. Seeing these old movies of them and she is 21-years-old and completely carefree you realize they are just babies (laughs). They didn’t know anything. You don’t always get to experience that because you are constantly growing older with them. But it was a way to see them before I was even born (…) and just this simple joy. There are so many great things from their wedding and honeymoon (…) and they were just goofy kids.

S: When you had written me, you explained that you chose artists who have shown a strong interest in figurative work and also those who are “seduced by nostalgia,” and I love that phrase. And I suffer from nostalgia. Personally I feel like it is a complicated emotion since it is really based on longing. When it hits me (…) for example, every time I listen to the Sonic Youth record “Sister” I feel nostalgia; I’m 15-years-old again. But it’s kind of a sad feeling. Yet I still listen to that record all of the time (laughs). Not unlike denial, nostalgia can be a memory that is kind of codified and compartmentalized by each person (…) it’s like plural realities. You know (…) we go to London and I would say, “Oh, London was great” and you might say, “London sucked.” It’s so personal.

J.S.: Right. There is no reality. It is something that we make ourselves.

S: Since the show seems kind of fueled somewhat by nostalgia, in your own experience did you have, for lack of a better word, an “awakening” in seeing these films?

J.S.: Well yeah, it’s certainly a part of it. But that’s the thing, this show is complicated. It’s complicated for me, personally, because I have had to examine my role, my place, my memories of my own family, my memories of myself within that family (…) originally the show was a purely objective (…) when I originally went through all of those films and picked out those image stills, what I was saying was, “Which of these images or compositions is a stand-alone?  You can look at this as its own kind of piece and it works.”

S: So what were your criteria in deciding that – because that is a lot of images to cull through? Why did you pick these specific images? (…)  because you were kind of picking the inspiration for the artists (…) or at least the initial idea.

J.S.: Well, it had to work as a composition. The colors (…) I was especially attracted to images where one of the people in the frame would have his or her back to the camera. I felt like when people are facing the camera, there is an automatic distance created between the viewer and the people in the film. But as soon as someone had their back turned, you are now looking over their shoulder at what’s going on and you’re actually sucked into it. So you’ll find many things like that which crop up in the images. I also enjoyed any image where people are oblivious to what is going on around them and looking directly into the camera as kind of a connection to that past and this present. That they seem to be aware that they are on film (…) we kind of touched on that idea earlier (…) this knowledge that they are communicating with the future.

S: So it seems like you were trying to pick images in their own right that were immersive to the viewer (…) and let alone, direct them towards visual artists who are usually willing to walk into those types of moments or ideas.

J.S.: Exactly.

S: Looking through the images and finished pieces, it’s interesting to me (…) how many times in contemporary art (…) and maybe it’s fading because of the tide of visual art shifting (…)  but there has been the use of these terms and concepts like “reappropriating” or “repurposing” images and materials. But with imagery in particular, some artists use found images and the artist has no real personal connection with it (…) other than maybe just liking the image and thinking that it’s funny or weird or some extinct part of the past. But in Our Shared Past all of the artists involved do have one united connection: and that is you. They might not know anyone in your family, but I would say out of the majority of the 34 artists, they all know you. Were the artists curious about the backstory or context of the image they selected; or did they prefer to stay “in the dark” and just imprint their own narrative onto the photo?

J.S.: It’s all over the place. Some artists didn’t want to know anything beyond selecting the actual picture so they could imagine it themselves. Other artists, like Overstreet for example, came over and we sat for a couple of hours and he just wanted to know, who is this; what’s their story, what was this person’s story? And his piece reflects that (…) he really delves into my whole family tree (…) and he comes away with this fairly weird and I would almost say, misguided view (laughs) (…) he didn’t take a lot of notes and I think a lot of it was that after he left his memory was almost jumbled, but that is really okay because that is really how it exactly works for all of us. We don’t take notes in life and our memories get jumbled. And his piece is fantastic. Some artists thought that image was about a certain thing, or they thought that the person in it was a particular family member and through our conversations I might have pointed out to them that it was not that way, that was not the story (…) and that made a big difference to them. They then said, “Oh, I don’t know if I want to use this image anymore” or “Knowing that completely changes what I am doing.” So it was helpful for some and completely unsettling for others as they were working through their own interpretations.

S: I respect the artists decisions to not want to know the story, but to me it almost seems impossible to look at a family photo or photo album and not have any questions (…) maybe not impossible but odd. You know just looking at a picture: “Who in the hell is this? What was happening here? Why is there a donkey (laughs) in this picture?” I want to get into the actual construction or strategy behind assembling the show. You are the curator of the show as well. I interviewed Holly Keris from the Cummer and it seems like she was pretty “hands off” and they kind of gave you carte blanche in curating this exhibit. I know that as co-curator of nullspace gallery, it seems as if you deliberately have stayed out of the way of each artist’s approach. However, I imagine with Our Shared Past you were obligated in being more directly involved; not in dictating what the artists would make but rather in a greater sense of coordinating and corralling 34 different artists. How has that experience been? As a curator, it seems like it would be a very different experience from your work at nullspace.

J.S.: Well yeah, the administration of this project is not something that I would, uh, recommend (laughs). Trying to get 34 artists to work to deadlines and there were just so many requirements from the Cummer (…) you know, we spent a lot of time interviewing each of the artists which turned out to be a tremendous experience for us, actually. We didn’t realize how important that was going to be. We actually thought that it was going to be very important for the show and thought we were going to use those interviews somehow (…) maybe produce a documentary film from them or (…) anyway, use that footage for something. We thought that we would at least use it for something in the catalog but it turns out we didn’t end up using it at all. The interviews were so long that they were beyond the amount of time I had to start editing them.

S: So what did you glean from those interviews?

J.S.:  What we got of it is was how personal the voyage was for each of the artists. They didn’t just pick any image at random and then knock out a piece and turn it in. They went through all of those images and really agonized over which one to pick, which one spoke to them. And then they had their own internal debate in how to use the image, how to use their own body of work in such a way to make it clear that it was them who did it (…) and yet kind of play along with the rules of the game and sticking with this source material. A lot of things about their own families came out in these interviews (…) many that were emotional. Some of the artists had so much trouble working with their piece that they had real breakthroughs on a personal level from working through them. The connection I had with all of the people in this show is like a family. Which is something I love (…) thinking about how this show starts with one family and kind of wraps around into another family and kind of closes the circle. My brother is coming up, my parents will be there and they don’t come to Jacksonville all that often so it’s going to be (…) very touching.

S: You get have this kind of blended reunion of blood relatives and this new family of artists.

J.S.: Yeah.

S: So comparing this experience with nullspace (…) did you ever feel like stepping back even more, since the idea of nullspace seems to be that the gallery is the canvas.  So did you feel any kind of inner friction? “Should I step in here? Should I not say this?”

J.S.: I guess in this case it feels to me like the artists were definitely free to do what they wanted and I picked particular artists in the show because I felt like they would “get it” (…) you know what I mean?

S: Right.

J.S.: So right there I was starting with kind of an unknown entity (…) but curating kind of takes place with me as to what are all of the various elements of this show and trying to identify them and pull them out (…) how much do we reveal of the original films? What do we do with the original stills? How do we display those with the finished work; or do we? How do we create this catalog so it ties all of that together and give the person reading it the sense of (…) the travels that I went through in understanding the show. It took me a long time to understand what the show was about. Which is weird, because you would think, “Okay, whatever, it’s a painting show. It’s a bunch of my friends and we’re doing this show.” But it’s not.

S: You know we’re less than two weeks away from it opening, so today, after going through this whole process with the artists, what is your understanding of the show?

J.S.: The show is much more about family than I intended it to be. I started out trying to make a show about painting and along the way I was making a show about manipulation (…) of manipulating the people in those films by splicing them up the way that I did and pulling out images that were not representational of what was going on in the scene. I was doing the converse; I was pulling out images that were misleading on purpose of what was happening there, to create a story and see how you could create a false story using real images from life (…) and eventually over the course of doing all of those interviews and trying to figure out what was my problem with those films, what was the lack of connection that I felt (…) and watching the artists grappling with their own pasts in creating the work, it became much more of a human endeavor and much less of an aesthetic one.

S: I was really intrigued how some of the artists seemed to break away from their better-known or at least more-familiar approaches to render these pieces; Christina Foard and Leslie Robison (…) and definitely Jim Draper in particular come to mind. Were you surprised at some of the results that came back? Did you feel like you had any expectations, in the sense of “Well, this artist is surely going to paint this in a familiar way”?

J.S.: Of course. Absolutely; and even after they picked the image, I thought “Of course, that makes perfect sense.” In some ways (…) like with Jim Draper, I don’t think anyone would look at that piece and think, “Oh – Jim Draper.” That’s a real departure and he plucked that scene out of an image that is a pure Jim Draper image. When he picked that, I thought, “Of course!” There’s this lush, green background and it’s one of the only original images that has kind of this idyllic, outdoors scene which is what he’s known for. He didn’t paint any of that. And that’s so interesting. Now Christina on the other hand, I feel like her piece really is in character. It’s a little less abstract than what she normally does but there are so many elements where you could tell it is one of her paintings.

S: In the background she really tapped into what she’s known for in creating these great abstractions, but for me just seeing this obvious figure lounging in front of this kind of moving background seemed to me like she shifted gears. That was fascinating to me.

J.S.: Yeah.

S: I was really impressed at the [Nov. 26] artist’s talk at the Cummer. I try to be impartial to some degree, as I imagine you have been with this exhibit, but I consider many of these friends to be friends (…) or at least allies (laughs) but at the presentation (…) in particular Christie Holechek her candor in speaking about what she has gone through and channeling that through this and seeing her piece, which I think is fucking amazing (…) where she took the image and produced this (…) memory in shrapnel.

J.S.:  Yes; just shards of glass (…) and that was one of the interviews where it was just (…) there were tears shed. It was such a great experience for us to get a chance to sit down with each of these artists (…) usually, the interviews average about two hours but some went longer (…) and to talk about everything that is personal to these artists about why they are artists. What is their work about? Why did they want to be in this show? Why did they pick this image? What about their own past and what was coming up? It was an amazing opportunity.

S: Well, at the talk Jeff Whipple wondered aloud, “Why don’t artists do this more often and get together and just talk?” So it seemed like the exhibit became a whole different vehicle for that to happen by bringing everyone together with this central idea. And then all of these other ideas spiral out of this source idea. So I want to ask about this: all of these artists did the work for free, right?

J.S.: That’s right.

S: So along with emerging artists the exhibit features artists whose work commands a pretty a good price. It seems like a pretty audacious request, especially for someone who is used to getting something for their work. You had a pool of artists in mind, but did you have any artists decline on the grounds of not being compensated for their time or work? And that seems like a reasonable question since artists surely want to sell their work.

J.S.: Right. But no (…) not a single artist; but what I did have is artists I didn’t originally think of coming to me and saying, “Please let me be in this show.” That’s the thing: the generosity of this arts community in Jacksonville is (…) amazing. It really is. The generosity of spirit (…) and the time and effort they put into this for no money (…) just out of love. And you can feel it.

S: You had sent me notes about the exhibit featuring an environment that kind of reenacts a 1970s living room.

J.S.: Yeah, that’s going to be installed on Monday.

S: So what are some of the other similar elements that will be featured along with the finished pieces?

J.S.: In addition to the imagery, we are going to have this room and in this room there is going to be a projector and it’s going to be a 70s-style living room where everyone has kind of just finished watching the movies. So you’ll see that there are these remnants of a family gathering (…) there’s no one left in the room. And the films are playing, but the films are excerpts of the original, uncut versions. What Jon [filmmaker Jonathan Shepard] is doing is taking scenes that surround the still images that I picked out (…) and when you get to that still image in this film, he’s inserting the image of the finished work of the artist. So he’s really going to tie the past with the present and what was portrayed in the sixties and what it has become through all of these different filters between my parents actually shooting the film, to me selecting out the images to the artists, their painting that image for certain reasons, and producing their finished work in a certain way. A big point of the show is that progression and putting together appropriation. In these artist interviews, we talked a lot about adding layers of meaning; every time someone touches these events, another layer of meaning is added. And so you’ll see that even the clause next to each piece in the show will have the title that I gave the still and the title that the artist gave their piece. In some cases they’re the same; in some cases they’re not. But that was an opportunity to talk about and show how many different layers of meaning have been added along the way. A second thing we will be doing of that major installation piece, which will be right in the entry way (…) when you come in you’ll be able to see the films from outside the gallery (…) is I took the still images and I made Viewmaster reels out of them. So the only way that you’ll get to see the original that the artist was working from will be to look through these Viewmasters that we will have.

S: That’s fantastic. How involved was that, creating those Viewmaster reels?

J.S.: I think it adds a lot and for me it took a long time to figure out, “What do we do with the original images? Do we show them? Do we not show them?” How big are they? Where do we put them? Should it be in a separate area?” And that idea came to me and it seemed just perfect; it really puts the timeframe front and center

S: Just talking to you and looking at the work (…) and I’m already getting answers back via e-mail from the artists (…) but it seems like it started out as this exploration of nostalgia and memory and as you said, it really wound up becoming about family. But personally, do you think now with the culmination of this project (…) it seems like there has been an element of you confronting yourself and your own views (…) do you think you were looking for some kind of closure or reconciliation with your own past?

J.S.: I don’t think that I was looking for that and I don’t even know if I am getting that. I don’t know if it is closure but what I think I am getting is insight. I certainly didn’t start out with (…) I didn’t even plan on watching the films (laughs). My childhood was fine and I’m sure if you asked me I’d say, “Yeah, it was pretty happy.” I could probably tell you a couple of happy events. But my memories of the past are very few. I have very few actual memories (…) it’s weird.

S: Why is that? Why do you think that is; just over time and aging?

J.S.: I don’t think it was important for me to hold onto them. I really don’t have a large collection of photos from my childhood in my personal collection. I think I have zero photos. I don’t have a single photo album. I mean, most people have something like that. I moved a lot, I moved around the world, and when you do that you don’t really wind up keeping a lot of your possessions. I have very few things that remind of me of the past. It might have been a conscious effort, or maybe even an unconscious one, just to move on. I am the kind of person who doesn’t like to repeat things. Even if I get lost (laughs) I don’t like to turn around. I start trying to find some other way to get there (laughs).

Brianna Angelakis

 

["Looking Back"]

[“Looking Back”]

["The Wedding Night," oil on canvas, 30 x 48; 2013.]

[“The Wedding Night,” oil on canvas, 30 x 48; 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Brianna Angelakis: I selected the photo “Looking Back” because of the engaging female figure dressing for her wedding. Of course, she’s simply making eye contact with the camera; however, her stare is exceptionally powerful in this particular moment. She looks over her shoulder with a sense of knowing. Disregarding the woman dressing her only makes the bride’s stare stronger. It’s truly a photograph that was just pleading to be made into a painting. The second I came across the image of the bride, I knew I had to paint her.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

B.A.: I actually made an entirely different painting for the show with the same photo reference prior to the painting I completed for the exhibit. I used a combination of several figures from different photographs as well as a room from one of the photos provided; however, the painting just wasn’t working for me.

Several months later I decided to make an entirely new painting with the same female figure. I wanted to create a “mirror moment” which is a common element in both literature and painting. A “mirror moment” usually represents a moment where a woman (sometimes a man) looks into a mirror and recognizes a change within herself. Other times she may not recognize the change; however, the reader or onlooker can decipher this moment. The wedding day (or in this case – “The Wedding Night”) is certainly a prime example of change for a person. To create this moment, I combined a number of small pieces (wine bottle, framed family photos, etc…) from several other photos provided. I also referenced photos from my own life such as the lower half of the bride’s gown which my sister wore on her wedding day. The bride’s face is also a composite of the bride’s face and my own. Her arm and hand are also my own. Whenever I’m working on a painting, I always utilize a number of different images to create a composition. This painting in particular really exploits my process as I combined at least fifteen different photographs to create the finished painting.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

B.A.: The bride adorned in her wedding dress definitely brought back memories of my sister’s wedding which had taken place several months prior to the start of my second painting attempt. The completed bride also reminded me of looking through my grandmother’s wedding photos when I was very young. Somehow the combination of my facial features with the bride’s features and hairstyle managed to create a woman much similar to a young version of my grandmother on her wedding day. This recognition caused me to age the space the bride resided within such as the walls and mirror.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

B.A.: These past few months I have been working toward my first solo exhibition which will be held at Modern Eden Gallery in San Francisco, CA in May of 2014. I’m trying to keep details regarding my solo show under wraps, but expect lots of whimsical female figures combined with magical realism. I also have a number of group exhibitions in 2014 in cities including Los Angeles, California; Chicago, Illinois; Portland, Oregon; Leeds, United Kingdom; and Frankfurt, Germany. It’s going to be a very exciting year!

briannaangelakis.com

facebook.com/BriannaAngelakisArt

instagram.com/brianna_angelakis

twitter.com/BAngelakis

briannaangelakis.tumblr.com

Thony Aiuppy

["Ghostly Baby"]

[“Ghostly Baby”]

["Reticent Slumber (an Effigy)," oil on three panels, 29 x 32; 2013.]

[“Reticent Slumber (an Effigy),” oil on three panels, 29 x 32; 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Thony Aiuppy: I chose to work with the photograph “Ghostly Baby.” This image is of a child in a carriage. The particular image is an interesting one for me. As my wife and I are in a season of growing our family and we have similar images stored in our phones, in family albums, and there are some that we have had printed and hang throughout our house. It’s perhaps one of the more quiet images in Jefree’s collection and I had an instant affinity towards it. The composition and pale color palette add to the somber quality of a moment long past and therefore becomes a moment in time worth remembering.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

T.A.: It took some time before I could grapple with how to represent this in a painting. I wanted to sustain the ambiguous solitude of a 1/16th of a second. When I began painting I allowed the work to build on top of previously laid color. I wanted the brushstrokes to have a memory of their own because that’s what these images are really all about: memory and their preservation thereof. The process of painting on top of older layers that had already begun to dry offered to me a sensation of time passing by while being still at the same time. (Please refer to my artist statement for more detail about the process.)

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

T.A.: To go further with what I addressed I addressed in your first question, memory and family life are intricately connected in the works produced for this exhibition. coming into this project as a participating artist only allowed me to embed my own personal history into the image that is not my own,  giving way to creating a new, original memory that otherwise could never have occurred. It is interesting that this collection of works will be seen by individuals in the gallery space who will then be able to participate in creating meaning and memories for themselves.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

T.A.: I have a solo exhibition in the North Gallery at CoRK Arts District. The opening reception is held on December 27 and will run into the New Year.

thonyaiuppy.com

Jessie Barnes

["Haunting"]

[“Haunting”]

["Haunting," oil on canvas, 24 x 30; 2013.]

[“Haunting,” oil on canvas, 24 x 30; 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Jessie Barnes: For this project, I chose the photograph entitled “Haunting.” Though the image was simple in composition, featuring a centrally placed figure and vague abstract background, it is powerful in interpretation. For one split second, literally, the world seems to revolve around this woman pictured, who happens to be a young and newly married version of Jefree’s mother, I later found out. What she was doing in that moment is unclear, but she seems undeniably determined about it. Before I chose this image, I had narrowed the several hundred pictures provided down to three, this image being one of them. I ended up looking at each of the images several times a day until I felt certain about one of them. During that time, when I viewed “Haunting,” the woman’s gaze appeared distinctly different on each occasion. Sometimes she seemed as if she were caught in mid-sentence, other times she looked angry, seductive, happy, and any number of other emotions. That one-seemingly-insignificant documentation of time could become so visceral and relatable was truly fascinating to me. There’s something so compelling about the notion of being stared at by a person of another time. It’s almost as if this young woman is sizing you up; watching you watch art. We, the viewers, become her victims. And so, “Haunting” became the one.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

J.B.: When beginning the painting, I certainly pondered the size. Being part of a very open and subjective exhibition was a thrill, because I had so many options. At that time, I had typically been working at a larger scale, but this one didn’t seem to fit somehow. Eventually, I decided to take a literal direction. The composition was transferred onto canvas and built up in thin glaze layers of oil paint – a very traditional approach. The finished painting is based in realism, which is where my training lies. It is directly proportional to its original photographic format, and relatively small, but the image feels large in terms of pictorial space. Not only does the woman’s aura fill her own composition, but her stare begins to invade our space as well.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

J.B.: As an artist who was already working with notions of time and memory as evidenced by photography, I was curious about how this painting would impact me. Being a young artist, I dare say that I don’t have the same types of memories as one who’s lived during the era of these images. I don’t have a connection to this time period. In fact, I feel very removed from it. But I do have a sense of reverence for the tangible – in part, I believe, because I am so disconnected from it. Don’t get me wrong – my parents’ home is filled with old photographs and scrapbooks, and in my own work, I use these images as sources. But there is a distinct difference in the memories that I hold. They are filled with the omnipresent and often quite menacing interference of technology. My painting for this exhibition depicts a subject who is embedded in this collective sense of past – one that I render but was never a part of. It’s honest yet mysterious, just like our own personal memories, regardless of time.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

J.B.: I am pleased to announce that I and another local artist and recent B.F.A. graduate, Franklin Ratliff, will be participating in a duo exhibition at CoRK in February. The show is set to open on Friday, February 21st, and seeks to encompass themes of a similar nature as Our Shared Past. The works will visually deal with the idea of a generational split, and how memory, the passage of time, and inclusion of technology has indeed separated us from our past.

jessiekbarnes.tumblr.com

Shannon Estlund

["Blue Danny"]

[“Blue Danny”]

["Distance I," mixed media on canvas, 24 x 24; 2013.]

[“Distance I,” mixed media on canvas, 24 x 24; 2013.]

["Distance II," mixed media on canvas, 24 x 24; 2013.]

[“Distance II,” mixed media on canvas, 24 x 24; 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Shannon Estlund: I was drawn to the mysteriousness of the image; the blue color and light quality make me think of twilight or an underwater image. Also, there was flexibility to the image with all the negative space, and few environmental clues about time and place. This allowed me a degree of license as an artist, and at the same time the image held a nostalgic potency for me.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

S.E.: I had a few ideas, and so I decided to do two variations on the image. In both paintings, the figure is reaching out, trying to make a personal connection. One painting shows the phases of the moon for a span of several years overlapping one another. The other painting has a galaxy of glitter overhead, and the figure himself is made of black and silver glitter. The use of glitter refers to childhood imagination and wonder. Both paintings function in a similar way: there is a vast environment of space and time surrounding the figure, which alludes both to the figure’s expansive/imaginative point of view, and also his vulnerable position in a tumultuous world. I considered choosing one of the two paintings for the exhibition, and in the end decided to show them both for the way that they reverberate with one another. By showing them together, they suggest a strange relationship to time: are the images simultaneous or in sequence? Are they separate people or the same person in two different situations? I think this speaks to the subjectivity of experience, and also how reality and memory are never fixed truths.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

S.E.: Initially, this image reminded me of my younger brother from the time when we were both kids – something about the particular age of the boy and the style of his haircut. As I worked on the paintings, I became more sensitive to the gesture he is making, how he seems to be reaching out to the person holding the camera, and I started to relate to the child in the image from more of a parental perspective. In this way I experienced a shift; from empathy with the figure from a child’s perspective to responding to the figure in a maternal, protective way. I tried to include both of these perspectives in the paintings: both the vulnerability of childhood and the experience of an expansive imagination.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

S.E.: I am living in the Twin Cities with my husband Mark Estlund, and we currently both have outdoor sculptures on display at Silverwood Park, Minneapolis, Minnesota. I have work in a group show currently on display at Rosalux Gallery in Minneapolis. Also, from August to November of 2014 I will have paintings up in the Specialty Clinic at the Hudson Hospital & Clinics in Hudson, Wisconsin in conjunction with the Phipps Center for the Arts. And September 2014 I will be showing paintings in one of Silverwood Park’s gallery spaces.

shannonestlund.com

Christiana Foard

["Picnic in the Trees"]

[“Picnic in the Trees”]

["The Stacked Wait," oil on canvas, 48 x 60; 2013.]

[“The Stacked Wait,” oil on canvas, 48 x 60; 2013.]

Starehouse:  What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Christiana Foard: I chose this picnic image because I felt it could tap into a personal memory from a childhood camping scene in the early 70s in Northern California. Additionally, I liked the stacked shapes near the female figure in the background. They were a strange assemblage and felt sculptural and quirky, like I could have an adventure in and around those shapes.

S.: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

C.F.: While I entered into this painting with an intention, I did not achieve my own goals. I wanted to paint the essence of this scene and find my own voice and my own emotions within the image. To do that, it had to feel personal and relevant. My work generally is driven by vague memories and imaginary structures and my most abstracted pieces attempt to evoke a sensation within that memory. (For example, I found snorkeling with my family last summer truly blissful. I was so moved by the sensations underwater that a series of abstracted paintings resulted which attempted to recreate the quiet, the movement, the seaweed tangles, and the shimmering light hitting an object on the sea floor.) I wanted to avoid “replicating” this picnic image in a straight-forward way. Ultimately, despite four different iterations, I began to reveal my quirky, painterly voice, but not within the allotted time frame. The painting I submitted for this exhibition was my 3rd of 4 paintings. The final painting, which hadn’t found full resolution by the deadline, was certainly the most authentic and personal of the paintings.

I learned a great deal about myself in the course of this struggle, and as with all obstacles, found the growth immensely helpful for my long-term evolution as a painter. Often, it takes me a while to relax my brain and lose the mental clutter of my past – the painters I admire whose masterful work intimidates me,  the critical comments in my past which try to tear down my ideas, and even the cloudy pressure created by my own paintings. Once these noisy thoughts depart my creative space, another more relaxed, more intuitive realm emerges; which opens to playfulness, risk-taking, and innovation. For this project, I entered into this realm too late. It may amuse you to know that my painted variations included a female in the foreground, who morphed into a man, then a boy, then back to a businessman. The female figure in the middle ground kept changing clothes and at one point was nude. On the foreground table, I had red stripes, then dark green flowers, a pie, figs, wine glasses, a cake. It all moved and shifted as my paintings often do. It’s the changing ideas and the willingness to try them out which builds the painted history behind my work and its surface textures. I enjoyed adding imaginative components to a photographic subject. And as with any project that includes a great idea and talented people, I am deeply grateful for the opportunity to be a part of this exhibition.

S.: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

C.F.: My second painting of 4 dealt with family history. This attempt was a convergence of Jefree’s image and another image from my family past overlayed, in an effort to find a more personal impact, which was not happening with the picnic scene on its own. The image I added, an image of a 7-year-old girl having just caught a fish, was of a deceased and important family member. It was painted tenderly and it became so powerful emotionally, that I could not paint into it. I could take no risks. Its spiritual impact paralyzed me. Eventually I opted to set it aside and start over.

S:  Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

C.F.: Yes! I am painting compiled memories of people who are dying in a long-term project that is designed in collaboration with a leading photographer and friend. Spending time with those who take nothing for granted and cherishes each opportunity to share their life’s meaning, is nothing short of divine and beautiful. I would like to do this throughout the remainder of my artist life, if possible. I found the Our Shared Past project particularly helpful to resolve some of the challenges I face between the perceived reality of their appearances and my own language to develop their painted essence.

cfoard.otherpeoplespixels.com

Margete Griffin

["Debbie Sue"]

[“Debbie Sue”]

["Running Down a Dream," acrylic on wood panel, 36 x 28; 2013.]

[“Running Down a Dream,” acrylic on wood panel, 36 x 28; 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Margete Griffin: I chose the image Debbie Sue instantly. A little girl in a plaid wool coat, running in a park in NYC. Why? Initially, I thought it was the running. Running away to NYC. I ran away to NYC once. I was trying to find my way on an art journey, much to the dismay of my family, without much explanation. Running free, after a long period of helping my parents in their last years.  Life is short…I felt I’d better go quick or I may never have the chance again. Funny how the urgency hits you suddenly and you just take off like a child…no real plan, just run like the wind. My work always carries symbolic elements and this perfectly mirrored my actions. Secondly, the image was nicely suited to my style with strong graphic appeal, simple color, and the composition framed perfectly with its bold diagonal line, beckoning you into the scene.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

M.G.: Pacing in the wee hours of the morning is my usual approach, and this time the answer came easily…I stumped my toe on this old frame in a dark hall. It had been setting there for months. When I was a child, it was my dresser mirror in my bedroom. It couldn’t find its place when I moved to my parent’s home after they passed. It was painted lime green in the late 60’s and I always meant to repaint it. It waited for the perfect night to remind me, there in the dusty darkness. By sunrise I had made a template to cut the wood I would paint on. Once you start, it’s a matter of obsession until completion. With every painting you build a relationship with it along the way.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

M.G.: As I began to draw in the figure, memories of my own child had me laughing almost to tears, as I recalled when he was almost that age and took off running on a cold winter day at the duck pond. Throwing caution to the wind and ignoring my warnings, he ran right along the bulkhead, and then …the predictable splash, and of course I jumped in to get him! Freezing tears and dripping wet we shivered on home, lesson learned. At another point, in painting the background, I decided to insert my own memories into the shadows; the bare branches casting long arms, coming out of the somewhat scary path and leading to a future unknown. The building’s shadows are those from Washington Square, where I stayed in Greenwich Village. Upon my arrival there, I first took off in the park and surprised the birds who took flight with my excited pace. After painting that night, I laid down and was thinking how at each age, there is a break away moment where it’s inevitable that you go your own way… find your own path. I raised a neighborhood of boys. There were five boys, and girls too, but the boys were the constant companions of my son. As I laid there wide awake, I thought about the men they had become, each on their different journey yet still connected like brothers. I bolted upright and ran back to the painting to add in some symbology of this thought, only to realize I had already added them. I had painted five birds, flying high to reach their goals. At that moment I acknowledged that role had changed from the running child, to the mother watching her flock disappear into the distance without looking back… a reality that was in the moment for myself. I would like to say I planned it that way, but no one was more surprised than me that these realizations occurred during the project. Lastly, after the painting was done and delivered, I was looking for reference on my next job and came across my mother’s photo album. I discovered a shot of me in a plaid wool coat, just the age of little Debbie Sue…same coat on a winter’s day in Columbus, Georgia. As different as I thought our backgrounds must be from NYC to the Deep South, I found also my mother picnicking in the woods, and looking out from a barn, and feeding deer at an animal park. Instead of a ride in a clown’s car, I had a pony ride that came by the house. There were boys making faces and old folks I don’t remember at family milestones, much like Jefree’s. There was my mother in her wedding dress, my father playing games. We really do share snapshots of common moments, frozen in time.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

M.G.: I will be having another screen print show on Friday, Feb. 14, 2014 on Valentine’s Day evening at Rain Dogs, 1045 Park St. in in Riverside. I am making hand-printed valentines with a dash of twisted humor, some new larger sized limited edition screen prints, and a few surprises that will be released that night. It will be up for a month. More projects are also in the preliminary stage as well. Check out my Facebook Artists page, Griffin House Studio, for photos of other work and show updates.

facebook.com/GriffinHouseStudio

Rebecca Hoadley

["Bathers"]

[“Bathers”]

["Courage," oil on canvas, 36 x 40; 2013.]

[“Courage,” oil on canvas, 36 x 40; 2013.]

["Picnic Table"]

[“Picnic Table”]

["Picnic," oil on canvas, 24 x 36; 2013.]

[“Picnic,” oil on canvas, 24 x 36; 2013.]

["Afternoon," oil on canvas, 24 x 36; 2013.]

[“Afternoon,” oil on canvas, 24 x 36; 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Rebecca Hoadley: One of the fantastic things about a collaboration painting lies in what both parties can bring to the table. Jeffery Shalev supplied intimate photos from his personal history, and in transferring them to the canvas, I was allowed to do the same. His family gatherings sparked memories from my own history, and while painting, I enjoyed reminiscing on the ties that bind our respective histories together. I worked on Afternoon and Picnic simultaneously, but found that Courage evoked a stronger attachment between the siblings portrayed and mine. While mixing colors for Courage, I was reminded of vacations at the beach and early memories of learning to swim. It is my hope that the title will apply to the viewer in the same way, and they feel a kinship between the figures on the canvas.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

R.H.: My ultimate goal was to successfully incorporate my painting style while honoring the content of the original photos from the collection. I am proud that the individuals in the final paintings represent the simple moments I sought to capture, while representing myself and the figures on the canvas. These paintings now have a history of their own. I have become fond of the final layers that have resulted on the canvas. I feel they encompass more than a history; they have a balance of nondescript and detail to tie to the original photo.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

R.H.: When initially thinking about this project, I did not realize how closely the themes presented would relate with my own inspirations. My inspiration for a painting arises from the seemingly mundane moments we interact upon within our respective settings, such as spending time together and caring for one another through conversation and companionship. The common and typical interactions one can easily dismiss often become poignant examples for recollection; they exist in the very moment I was able to capture in Courage, and one I feel the entire collection represents. These paintings capture the beauty in our ‘daily routine’ and highlight the responsibilities we feel pull us away from the important moments in life. Looking at these demands as opportunities for inspiration requires one to slow down and examine the mundane in a new light. This process allows me to emphasize the concept of community, and create a product that represents the value of gathering together with the ones we love. There is a passage in the book of James that also parallels the feelings I had while working on this project. In James 4:13-14 it says “…You do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes…” This verse further serves to emphasize the importance of the brief moments we partake in during the demands of our responsibilities and interests, pointing the reader to reflect and enjoy the community we occupy.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

R.H.: I recently submitted a piece for a participatory art, nature, and history project created by Miami artist Xavier Cortada to commemorate Florida’s quincentennial in 2013. The description of the project is quoted from the site:  “The project marks the importance of the moment when the history of our state changed forever and gives us a glimpse of what its landscape was like 500 years ago. A team of scientists selected the 500 native flowers – the same ones that grew in our state when Juan Ponce de Leon landed in 1513 and named it “La Florida”–from “flor,” the Spanish word for flower. Five hundred Floridians were then invited to depict 500 native wildflowers. The artwork, along with information about each flower, will be posted on the project website. A team of historians selected individuals who helped shape Florida history.  Florida schools and libraries (across the 67 counties and 8 regions) are encouraged to plant 500 wildflower gardens, dedicating them to one of 500 important Floridians selected by a team of historians. These 500 new native habitats will help support Florida’s biodiversity.”

rebeccahoadley.com

Rebeccahoadley.tumblr.com

Jason John

 

["Donkey"]

[“Donkey”]

["With the Donkey," oil on canvas, 42 x 30; 2013.]

[“With the Donkey,” oil on canvas, 42 x 30; 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Jason John: The image I choose is so fascinating. I mean (all of the images) are fascinating, but I was really drawn to the images with the human/animal dichotomy. I did not want to know much about the history of the image. I really wanted to interpret the image cold and clinical. I wanted to let my inner-psyche read the image instead of attempting a matter-of-fact re-exploration of little Jimmy at the petting zoo. The photo brought to mind the many interpretations of St. Jerome with the Lion, but instead of a lion the beast was a donkey and the saint was a child. This relationship is absurd. Another great difference between this particular image and St. Jerome depictions is the strange isolation and removal of the child from the Donkey. The child was so removed from the donkey, making the whole scene read as very artificial and staged, and I am sure it was. There is a kind of absurdity to how I was reading this image. I am almost ashamed to see such an innocent scene in this way, but the artist’s interpretation is what made this project so fun.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

J.J.: For a few months I had a few of the Our Shared Past images on my studio wall. I kept coming back to the image with the child and donkey. I feel that the process of making my personal work is so analytical that I really wanted to go with intuition on this piece. I wanted to paint Jefree without his shirt, standing in as the child in the family photo. The more I thought this is a terrible idea, the more I wanted this to be my piece. I called Jefree and asked if he would model for me. He agreed. The rest was history.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

J.J.: I don’t think anyone looks back at these kinds of images (old family photos) with a full recollection of the where and who. The entire experience is full of disbelief and mental slippage. Recently, my family happened by some old images.  As a third generation out, looking at our family images, I can recognize close family but left questioning who most of the people in the photos are. This is one reason I did not want Jefree to share the history of the images with me.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

J.J.: I have a piece at Gauntlet Gallery’s winter exhibition; the gallery is located in San Francisco, California.  I will be having a solo exhibition at Manifest Gallery in Cincinnati, Ohio in January.

jasonjohnart.com

Rachel Levanger

["Boys 2"]

[“Boys 2”]

["My Coming of Age: Boys," acrylic and latex on canvas, 20 x 32 (two canvases at 16 x20 each); 2013.]

[“My Coming of Age: Boys,” acrylic and latex on canvas, 20 x 32 (two canvases at 16 x20 each); 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Rachel Levanger: The image I ended up using for the show actually chose me.  I initially picked a different one, and when I told Jefree my concept, he urged me to choose an additional photograph to work with. As I looked through the collection of photos over the next week or so for a second option, the image I ended up painting would resonate and bring something up from my subconscious each time I saw it, but due to the charged nature of the personal content of the image it took a couple of glasses of wine for that urge to manifest itself as the click of a mouse and me impulsively claiming it as my own. The next morning I honestly wondered if I would regret going down the path that was this painting, but I forged ahead, knowing that the work needed to be done, and knowing that I had to tell this story.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?
R.L.: The seed for my initial idea actually came from working on a different image.  The idea was to address this gap between our imagined, anticipated, or recalled experience and the often rather mundane feeling that comes from the actual experience itself. Although it was beautiful, the sketch I worked up was at odds with what I was reading at the time about painting and the problem of clichés in works of art: the image came too easily, too quickly. It felt obvious and safe and I wanted to break through this clichéd representation of the concept and deny such an obvious play on the nostalgia of the project. To do this, I read through David Joselit’s “American Art Since 1945” to reacquaint myself with traditions in modern and contemporary art and further investigated themes in pop art by reading Lucy R. Lippard’s treatment of the subject.

[Rachel Levanger’s initial idea for the piece: “It Was Supposed to be Fun.”]

[Rachel Levanger’s initial idea for the piece: “It Was Supposed to be Fun.”]

My initial idea made heavy use of language and text to convey the concept.  The first step in breaking through this was to turn the words into visual symbols, and these symbols then turned into real, physical objects. Eventually, through working with the two images and ideas in parallel, each informed the other and, by the end, the “Boys 2” piece was the stronger piece so I went with it.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

R.L.: I’m not sure I had many realizations about my past, per se, but I did find some connections where I had not anticipated. For example, my use of the grid was initially a nod to Warhol’s use of the repeated image as a way to disarm it, but as I recalled my own past experiences with boys and men throughout my coming of age, I recalled a time when I used to imagine them (the boys) all lined up in front of me, or arranged in a grid like soldiers. Perhaps this imagery at the time served to distance me from my own experiences, or to maybe corral and collect them all up so I could view them all at the same time. On this vein, through creating this work I tried to recount all of my past experiences with boys (now men, of course) and the creation of this work seemed to collect up all of these experiences, collapsing the narrative of the unfolding of time.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

R.L.: Since I am currently in a graduate program for mathematics, I would like to find a way to use mathematical ideas to inform my painting.  I really have no idea what this will lead to, but I’m excited to find out!

rachellevanger.com

Denise Liberi

 

["Backstraps"]

[“Backstraps”]

["Backstraps," mixed media, 7 x 5 x 4; 2013.]

[“Backstraps,” mixed media, 7 x 5 x 4; 2013.]

[Depth shot of "Backstraps."]

[Depth shot of “Backstraps.”]

["Bathers"]

[“Bathers”]

["Bathers," mixed media, 7 x 5 x 4; 2013.]

[“Bathers,” mixed media, 7 x 5 x 4; 2013.]

[Depth shot of "Bathers."]

[Depth shot of “Bathers.”]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?
Denise Liberi: It was very difficult to choose just one image, so I ended up interpreting two – Bathers and Backstraps. These two film stills presented me with philosopher Roland Barthes’ concept of punctum, “that accident which pricks me (but also bruises me, is poignant to me).” I was visually intrigued by multiple elements – the simple compositions, the dated coloring, the presence of pools and bathing suits. These elements have reoccurred within my work for as long as I can remember. Conceptually, I was drawn to the backward facing figures and the connection between the two images.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

D.L.: When Jefree asked me to be part of this collaborative project, I was on a cross-country road trip from Jacksonville to my new home of Oakland, California. Having no studio space and limited access to art supplies, it was apparent that I needed to create something small to work on throughout my travels. I consider myself foremost a painter, but had also recently been making a number of three-dimensional diorama structures. During the process, I allowed myself to add to and subtract from the original images to create the resulting works for Our Shared Past.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

D.L.: I wouldn’t say that the experience brought up any realizations or memories from my own family. A more general sense of the past was, however, something that I thought about a lot while making these works. What makes old photographs so enchanting is their ability as objects to transcend time and place.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

D.L.: Currently, I am working with the Museum of Children’s Arts to create a drop-in studio-space for urban youth and families in downtown Oakland. It is truly a blend of my passions – art making and teaching.

deniseliberi.wordpress.com

mocha.org/about/staff-ta/

Patrick Moser

["Revolutionary"]

[“Revolutionary”]

["Lindy for Lois," still from video performance; 2013.]

[“Lindy for Lois,” still from video performance; 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Patrick Moser: Thanks so much for having me and special thanks to Jefree Shalev for making this all possible. I chose a still titled, Revolutionary, in which Jefree’s mother Lois is captured in mid-stride in front of an old cannon. I like the way she moves without regard for the camera. Since the image is an 8mm still, extracted from a pre-existing narrative, I thought her gesture expressed an aliveness beyond the trappings of a photograph. In other words, I tried to find an image that offered some room to play.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

P.M.: The stills Jefree made available to us are quite beautiful and from the beginning I was never wholly convinced they needed to be turned into paint. I made a number of paintings of Lois in her amazing pants but the results were never vital for me. After speaking with Jefree and learning that Lois was alive and planning to attend the exhibit I contacted her directly, at which point the piece became a collaboration. Lois was very receptive and we began an email correspondence in which I learned more about her and her family. Thankfully, Jefree was open to the idea of a video performance so I asked Lois directly what she wanted to do. After a few exchanges she mentioned the Lindy Hop and I knew then what the work would be. I learned the basic nine-count steps and practiced through the fall. I wanted to invite Lois to dance with me but space and time made that impossible. I was seeking out a dance partner when my wife suggested I invite my own mother to participate, which made sense and seemed to express the nature of this entire project perfectly. My mother was game, as I knew she would be, and she began to practice on her own in North Carolina. We eventually recorded a performance in the Solarium here at Flagler College in late October. We danced the Lindy Hop, as best we could, to fantastic original music composed by one of our BFA students, Kevin Mahoney.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

P.M.: I suppose I should be completely honest here and admit that the general themes involving family memories and nostalgia are simply not that compelling to me. Don’t get me wrong, reflection is essential; I just couldn’t get excited until I moved beyond those general notions. Perhaps old family images are so ubiquitous in our culture that they have lost their power to me. There is almost no intimacy or privacy in them any longer. It’s difficult for me to locate anything beyond a kind of surface sentimentality. I stumbled along and eventually used the image Jefree provided to contrive a new experience. He shared his family with me and I reciprocated, because sharing the present is more exhilarating than sharing the past.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

P.M.: Currently, I’m making work for an exhibit at the Florida Mining gallery in the spring, which should be fun and may involve more dancing.

patrickmoserpaintings.com

Sara Pedigo

["Floating"]

[“Floating”]

["Swimmer," oil on canvas, 12 x 16; 2013.]

[“Swimmer,” oil on canvas, 12 x 16; 2013.]

["What's for Dinner"]

[“What’s for Dinner”]

[“In the Night Kitchen," oil on canvas, 5 x 7; 2013.]

[“In the Night Kitchen,” oil on canvas, 5 x 7; 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Sara Pedigo: I chose to recreate two of the film stills as paintings for this project; I will just talk about one of them. The first image that I selected was of Jefree’s mother in a pool, floating very close to the surface in a white bathing cap. I was initially drawn to many of the images in the collection, but kept coming back to “Floating”. This picture had a very strong quality of contemplation. There is intrinsically something that attracts me to images of people in water. The image deeply connected to my own experiences of floating just below the surface, water lapping against my skin and the sun’s warmth on my face. I am also visually drawn to how water breaks up and reveals the body in unusual ways

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

S.P.: Through the act of painting I attempted to stay very close to the original source image’s composition and inherent beauty. The only significant change was the coloration; the source photo’s colors were muted. Through the act of painting I worked to create colors that carried the same intensity that would have appeared on the day the film was created, resulting in an image with higher saturation.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

S.P.: Since 2005, my own painting practice has incorporated snap-shots of my family that range from the early 1940’s through the1980’s. I am frequently drawn to photos of relatives that I have no personal connection to. I see a deep sense of shared humanity in the evidence of lives and moments caught in photographs. I initially began working with the photos because they featured images of my mother’s youth and health; she passed away in 2006 from a long battle with cancer. I deeply understand the power that accompanies seeing youthful images of one’s mother. I saw the opportunity for participating in this show as a way to recognize this power, and capture the beauty present in another person’s family. I am also very thrilled at the prospect of Jefree’s mother seeing all of the artworks. It seems like it will be a magical moment!  I plan to vicariously live through Jefree sharing all of the works with her, since my mother has never seen any of the paintings I have created for her.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

S.P.: Yes, thank you for asking. One of my paintings, Blue Eyes When, is currently featured at Blue Mountain Gallery, located in the Chelsea Gallery District in New York. The juror for the exhibition was Andrea Wells of Tibor de Nagy Gallery.

Additionally, several of my paintings are part of the Ponte Vedra Cultural Center’s Small Objects Show, which runs during the month of December. All artworks in the show are under $350 for the holiday shopping season.

Lastly, I have paintings at Plum Contemporary Gallery, located at Nine Aviles Street in St. Augustine, through January.

bluemountaingallery.org

ccpvb.org/current-exhibition.html

plumartgallery.com

sarapedigo.com

Kurt Polkey

["Bite Size Pieces"]

[“Bite Size Pieces”]

["Little Boy," marker, white out, pencil, and glitter on paper and oil on panel, 46 x 46; 2013.]

[“Little Boy,” marker, white out, pencil, and glitter on paper and oil on panel, 46 x 46; 2013.]

["Watching Dad Hit"

[“Watching Dad Hit”]

["National Pastime," marker, white out, pencil, and glitter on paper and oil on panel, 24 x 24; 2013.]

[“National Pastime,” marker, white out, pencil, and glitter on paper and oil on panel, 24 x 24; 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Kurt Polkey: I’d forgotten that my dad played softball. When I was a little kid I would go with him to the ballpark on game nights. Sometimes I would find a group of kids to play with and sometimes I would hang out in the dugout with the players and watch the game. When I saw the picture from Our Shared Past of a son watching his father play baseball, I knew instantly that that would be my image.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

K.P.: But how can I make a painting that could convey the freedom that belongs only to a child who thinks his dad is a giant who will live forever? I can’t. And that was a source of great frustration for me in this process.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

K.P.: I don’t feel like I conveyed any insight into my painting. Because I had such a personal response to the image and because the image doesn’t belong to me, but to someone else who has an even deeper personal attachment, I didn’t feel able to alter it too much. I was never able to make the image mine. My painting turned out to be just a copy of someone else’s photograph.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

K.P.: I’m a co-founder of nullspace projects, an experimental curatorial team in Jax. We are currently working with Florida Mining Gallery. Our next exhibit is a pre-career retrospective for Los Angeles based artist David De Boer.

polkey.wix.com/kurt-polkey-ii

kurt-polkey.squarespace.com

nullspaceprojects.com

Leslie Robison

["Boys"]

[“Boys”]

[“Periphery," oil on wood panel, 18 x 24; 2013.]

[“Periphery,” oil on wood panel, 18 x 24; 2013.]

["A Landing Stuck"]

[“A Landing Stuck”]

[“Rush," oil on wood panel, 18 x 24; 2013.]

[“Rush,” oil on wood panel, 18 x 24; 2013.]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph? What did you find compelling or fascinating about this particular image?

Leslie Robison: The first image I chose was Boys 1.And I think what attracted me was its focus on blankness, or the unknown space between people. Perhaps this is because my own work tends to use plenty of isolating space around the figures and the words that I paint or draw. When I completed this piece, titled Periphery, I began looking for another image that encompassed a sense of isolation – A Landing Stuck does this in a different way – the figure is concentrating on her own action, she does not look at the viewer, and she is also relegated to a separate space in the image from the cars. (And the cars also contain encapsulated people.)

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

L.R.: Another aspect of these images that attracted me was their lack of clarity, or crisp outline. Since Jefree captured the images from a video, the sense of the moving image persists even though we, as viewers, read them as photographic. When I chose these images and began painting them, I knew I wanted to create a softness, or lack of definition around the forms as much as I could. This was much easier with the second image I chose (A Landing Stuck, renamed Rush in my painting) because the movement of the figure and the cars in the background create a blur of movement. In the other image, the lack of clarity is a result of the photographer panning across a gathering.  I built the paintings differently to achieve this – Periphery contains a lot of glazed layers while Rush has some layering but is painted more directly.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

L.R.: What was compelling for me in this process, and a little difficult, was the fact that I was revisiting my own past as an artist. I spent about ten years making paintings and drawings from other people’s found photographs as a way of contemplating lost moments of time. For me, this activity was laden with mourning – even though I didn’t know the subjects pictured, the photographs were always about loss. Our Shared Past is a little bit about this for me again. Because the subjects I painted for this project do not make eye contact with the viewer, I was able to avoid the memento mori connotations of the photograph that haunted my old work.

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

L.R.: Currently, I have work online as a part of Xavier Cortada’s participatory project, FLOR500, and I am acting as this region’s curator for the project.

leslierobison.us

leslierobisonart.blogspot.com

Chip Southworth

["Split Screen"]

[“Split Screen”]

["Rise of the Matriarch," mixed media (acrylic, graphite, ink, and carbon) on wood panels, 80 x 108; 2013.]

[“Rise of the Matriarch,” mixed media (acrylic, graphite, ink, and carbon) on wood panels, 80 x 108; 2013.]

[Detail from "Rise of the Matriarch."]

[Detail from “Rise of the Matriarch.”]

Starehouse: What image did you select to interpret and why did you choose that particular photograph?

Chip Southworth: I chose this image of Jefree’s mother getting ready (dressed) before her wedding… I loved the image instantly; it really worked for me … I thought she was thinking “Can you believe that we finally reached this day” however, it turns out it was probably closer to “Wholly shit! We are actually doing this?”  They had only known each other six weeks or something like that…true love.

S: Could you describe your approach and process in turning the source photograph into your completed work for the exhibit?

C.S.: The scale of my work is daunting… First I start out by projecting a rough outline image. Then I begin my real work by developing the drawing, playing with curves, and shading with graphite sticks, then I burn sections with a blow torch, then comes the ink, then the paint… I use large brushes and knives for the most part, but do occasionally call on a normal sized brush. I burn more sections that have been painted; now, repeat the process several times… before deciding a piece is completed.

S: Our Shared Past seems to address universal themes of family, memory, nostalgia, the passing of time, etc…During this experience, did working with your particular chosen image and the process of creating seem to bring up any specific personal realizations or memories from your own family and sense of the past? If so, what were they and how were these insights conveyed into your finished piece?

C.S.: Pure Nostalgia!  I looked back at lots of the images often during the three months that I worked on this piece. They mirrored much of my childhood.  My father was the consummate tourist; my mom was a bit of adventurer with a penchant for the beach… Roadside motel pools are some of my fondest memories as a young boy. We didn’t have much money, but we still traveled a good deal…visiting cousins and friends speckled across the southeast stopping at every attraction along the way from six-gun territory to the Land of Oz,

S: Do you have any other current or upcoming projects?

C.S.: I just returned from Art Basel Miami Beach. I had five large new pieces that just showed at North of Modern (#NOMO). They are large scale pieces that delve into the controversy of breast cancer awareness. The images have been well received by many and kinda shunned at the same time, maybe for their stark reality; maybe for the questions they pose… The images are strong and everything that I wanted them to be… including painterly. Tuesday, the Our Shared Past show opens at the Cummer, I plan to be at as many events as possible while the show runs… Other than that I am just gonna keep painting like this might keep taking off… I am pretty vested in this current series, I need another six or seven pieces. I have a few commissions that I have to work on, and I am hoping to take more art into the streets in 2014. In short, I am busy, but hope to paint throughout the next year producing new and provoking work.

chipsouthworth.com

ARTIST IMAGES FROM OUR SHARED PAST

Mark Creegan

["Too Sensitive," 32 minute loop of all 175 original source images, SD video; 2013.]

[“Too Sensitive,” 32 minute loop of all 175 original source images, SD video; 2013.]

Jim Draper

["She's 21"]

[“She’s 21”]

["Vermeer, Vermeer," colored pencil, graphite, found frame, gold leaf, and vellum, 27 X 23; 2013.]

[“Vermeer, Vermeer,” colored pencil, graphite, found frame, gold leaf, and vellum, 27 x 23; 2013.]

Overstreet Ducasse

["Family Tree," mixed media piece based on many of the original images, 62 X 90; 2013.]

[“Family Tree,” mixed media piece based on many of the original images, 62 x 90; 2013.]

Crystal Floyd

["Fuck! A Deer!"]

[“Fuck! A Deer!”]

["Fuck! A Deer!"; wood, fabric, acrylic, vinyl, paper, thread/embroidery (machine and hand stitched) framed in cypress wood, 21 x 27; 2013.]

[“Fuck! A Deer!”; wood, fabric, acrylic, vinyl, paper, thread/embroidery (machine and hand stitched) framed in cypress wood, 21 x 27; 2013.]

Mark George

["Bobbing"]

[“Bobbing”]

["Bobbing," acrylic and aerosol on corrugated plastic, 24 x 26; 2013.]]

[“Bobbing,” acrylic and aerosol on corrugated plastic, 24 x 26; 2013.]

Liz Gibson

["The Pledge"]

[“The Pledge”]

["The Pledge," watercolor on paper, 45 x 53; 2013.]

[“The Pledge,” watercolor on paper, 45 x 53; 2013.]

Christie Holechek

["Looking Glass"]

[“Looking Glass”]

["Something Blew," mixed media on canvas, 60 x 48; 2013.]

[“Something Blew,” mixed media on canvas, 60 x 48; 2013.]

Chance Isbell

["Dark"]

[“Dark”]

["Dark," mixed media (acrylic, ink, wallpaper paste, butcher paper, stain, and lacquer on wood), 22 x 34; 2013.]

[“Dark,” mixed media (acrylic, ink, wallpaper paste, butcher paper, stain, and lacquer on wood), 22 x 34; 2013.]

Marcus Kenney

["White Shawl"]

[“White Shawl”]

["A Night to Remember," wall paper, checks, marble dust, oil, acrylic, gold leaf, tissue paper, cards, lace, cigarette paper, blue print, postage stamp, acrylic polymer medium, etc... on canvas, 48 x 60; 2013.]

[“A Night to Remember,” wall paper, checks, marble dust, oil, acrylic, gold leaf, tissue paper, cards, lace, cigarette paper, blue print, postage stamp, acrylic polymer medium, etc… on canvas, 48 x 60; 2013.]

Jonathan Lux

["The Dive"]

[“The Dive”]

[“The Return,” oil on canvas, 15 x 20; 2013.]

[“The Return,” oil on canvas, 15 x 20; 2013.]

Dat Nguyen

["Dancing"]

[“Dancing”]

[“Dancing,” oil on canvas, 30 x 36; 2013.]

[“Dancing,” oil on canvas, 30 x 36; 2013.]

Madeleine Peck Wagner

["Posture 1"]

[“Posture 1”]

[“Imagining Relativity {idealized deviation 1}”; pencil on paper with flashe paint, watercolor, and spray paint, 44 x 61; 2013.]

[“Imagining Relativity {idealized deviation 1}”; pencil on paper with flashe paint, watercolor, and spray paint, 44 x 61; 2013.]

Morrison Pierce

["Why Pay More?"

[“Why Pay More?”]

[“Where Did Grandma Go?”; acrylic and ink on canvas, 34 x 42; 2013.]

[“Where Did Grandma Go?”; acrylic and ink on canvas, 34 x 42; 2013.]

Tony Rodrigues

["You Can Count Every Rib"]

[“You Can Count Every Rib”]

["Playground Virility," acrylic and polycrylic varnish on canvas, 36 x 42; 2013.]

[“Playground Virility,” acrylic and polycrylic varnish on canvas, 36 x 42; 2013.]

Shaun Thurston

["Pastel Pool"]

[“Pastel Pool”]

["Only Lonely When I’m Not Alone," oil on panel, 32 x 40; 2013.]

[“Only Lonely When I’m Not Alone,” oil on panel, 32 x 40; 2013.]

Jeff Whipple

["See Saw Fun"]

[“See Saw Fun”]

["Now You See, Now You Saw," (detail) paint, ink, digital media, video, canvas, and wood, 81 x 24; 2013.]

[“Now You See, Now You Saw,” (detail) paint, ink, digital media, video, canvas, and wood, 81 x 24; 2013.]

Steve Williams

"Riding With Bobo"

[“Riding With Bobo”]

[“Clown Parade with Cowboy Attack - Shirt Tucked, Gun Loaded, Ready Let’s Go,” mixed media on mahogany, 72 x 108; 2013.]

[“Clown Parade with Cowboy Attack – Shirt Tucked, Gun Loaded, Ready Let’s Go,” mixed media on mahogany, 72 x 108; 2013.]

Tony Wood

["Brooklyn"]

[“Brooklyn”]

[“Bridesmaids and Bouquets," oil and mixed media on canvas, 42 x 54; 2013.]

[“Bridesmaids and Bouquets,” oil and mixed media on canvas, 42 x 54; 2013.]

 

Daniel A. Brown

starehouse@gmail.com

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s