Ralph
Slatton is professor of art at East Tennessee State University. He is in
charge of the printmaking program where he teaches drawing, intaglio, screen
process, and lithography. He received the BFA and MA from Arkansas State
University, and the MFA from the Univeristy of Iowa. Slatton's major
media is intaglio printmaking, where he explores a narrative approach to
contemporary fable. His animal imagery provides a facade, disguising our
many human foibles. His recent work is heavily influenced by
“Watership Down,” an animated movie based on Richard Adams’novel, in
which animal hierarchy represent corruption of power in a social order.
Grotesque Art 11.02.2010
The purpose of this website is to explore what I refer
to as grotesque art. Much
of the legacy of modern and post modern art reflects the angst of our
times. My students often remark, why do contemporary artists depict ugly
stuff. I define this "stuff" as an expression of societal neuroses.
In this sense, the controversial artist is the lens that often reports
the ills of humanity. Many contemporary artists push this envelope, blurring the lines between shock value and
valueless schlock. Below, I have referenced Picasso's famous "Guernica"
painting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guernica_(painting)
I certainly wouldn't ever label this work anywhere near "schlock," an
unflattering term that describes what many call bad art. However, I do
think this work was truly shocking for its time. Although inspired by
the bombing of Guernica, Picasso takes liberties; the actual tragedies of
Guernica are abstracted and exaggerated beyond actual historical events. The power of
the work is its ability to convey raw terror. It depicts a screaming mother cuddling her
dead child, a horse gasping its last tortured breath, decapitated fallen soldier sprawling on the
ground, and chaotic figures providing a compositional backdrop, all portrayed
in Picasso's revolutionary Cubist style. Also
see: "Picasso's shriek horrors war" by Vincent Browne
Pablo Picasso's "Guernica," 1937, Oil on
Canvas, 349 cm × 776 cm
Clearly, Picasso broke normalcy in the sense of
revolutionizing artistic conventions, as well as, conveying controversial
imagery.
Let me now jump to another era and look at Andres Serrano's
famous work, "Piss Christ." (see
photo) Serrano's work depicts a
Christ crucifix, immersed in urine. Serrano's desire to shock is handled in an entirely different way
from Picasso's work. Serrano's attention is less on the art object and
more on the conceptual nature of the work. The piece explores
issues of intolerance, but in an unconventional manner. Ironically,
when conservative Christians express their outrage through protest, they unknowingly contribute
to the piece. Attempts to censor become incorporated as part of the
piece, thereby placing the artistic lens on issues of societal intolerance.
See also: http://www.artsandopinion.com/2004_v3_n3/pisschrist.htm
Damien Casey states in his article, Sacrifice, Piss Christ, and Liberal
Excess,
"Piss Christ questions the boundaries between the sacred and the
profane, it enacts what it represents. It threatens the identity of
conservative Christians who respond by seeking to exclude it from the public
realm."
Serrano's themes are undoubtedly about shock.
However, with his use of
controversial mediums, such as menstrual blood, urine, and excrement, he
leaves
the viewer feeling a bit duped.
Although open to debate, many believe the work lacks aesthetic integrity
and panders to grotesque overkill. With this reasoning, one can debate
whether there is little difference between
Serrano's methods, from that of painting a glistening tear drop on the
cheek of a clown's black velvet portrait. Both attempt to
play with emotions in a blatantly crass manner.
Serrano seems to spell out explicitly an intent to trick the viewer in a
rather vulgar manner.
However, one defense of Serrano's work is that he is only expressing what is
already the Christian's obsession with bodily fluids. Because he shows
this outside of its usual context, it is seen to be sacrilegious. He
allows the crowds to jump to their own conclusion, ultimately adding the
capstone to his conceptual piece.
In my opinion, this appears to be a deceptive ploy, fishing for a predictable
response. Because of heated reactions by onlookers, I question whether Serrano's piece allows for
much introspection. If art is to move a crowd, it
must work on a myriad of levels. It must allow the audience
to read between its gestured
lines and see the true depth of its aesthetics. I don't think Serrano gives us many
options to this regard. To see
Serrano's images please visit: Daily Plate of Crazy - "When Shock Meets Schlock"/
Reflections by Ralph Slatton:
A wise
critic once gave me an analogy about shock art compared to color
mixing. If you can put a name to the color, your
palette probably lacks interest. If you use colors straight out of the tube, you
haven't fully lived up to the potential of the work. Equally so,
concepts should be mixed and divorced from the tube label. Whole
worlds can
be depicted in a wink and a nod, in the nuance of a shadow, or the subtle stance
of a figure. Our times are filled with overt obscenities. These
are best expressed with eloquence.
http://vitae.ralphslatton.org
Download document