Link to Post:
http://hyperallergic.com/59963/beer-with-a-painter-judith-linhares/
Jennifer Samet interviews painter Judith Linhares about her work.
Speaking about her process Linhares remarks: "I might start my canvases with a ground of half purple and half yellow, and go from there. I work with complementary colors a lot. I do not trust ideas that come to my mind – instead, they have to come through the process, or be developed through the process. Otherwise, they look like something I have cooked up. When you put down yellow and violet, you create a sense of light, and that might suggest something. A yellow ochre on top of the yellow might suggest a backlit animal. I have a chance to surprise myself and invent the space as I work on it, rather than it being external. I am never thinking of it as flat, and I am usually thinking of it as a landscape environment. There is distant space, middle space, and near space, and things are happening in those spaces. What happens sometimes is that the idea will get developed over studies or redoing the painting. But it is very important to me that they come out of the brushstrokes, rather than being conceptualized ahead of time."
Link to Post:
http://www.twocoatsofpaint.com/2012/07/what-is-bad-painting.html
Taking Michael H. Miller's post of images from the 1978 New Museum exhibition Bad Painting as a catalyst, Sharon Butler asks if the label should be revisited in a contemporary context with "some specific examples, because the changing nature of what we consider bad painting is a fascinating subject for a good discussion. If these paintings, which generally tend to mash-up surrealism and humorous fantasy imagery, were considered 'bad' in the 1970s, what would be considered 'bad' today?"
In 1978 Bad Painting curator Marcia Tucker introduced the show by writing: "The freedom with which these artists mix classical and popular art-historical sources, kitsch and traditional images, archetypal and personal fantasies, constitutes a rejection of the concept of progress per se. . . . It would seem that, without a specific idea of progress toward a goal, the traditional means of valuing and validating works of art are useless. Bypassing the idea of progress implies an extraordinary freedom to do and to be whatever you want. In part, this is one of the most appealing aspects of 'bad' painting - that the ideas of good and bad are flexible and subject to both the immediate and the larger context in which the work is seen."
