I've recently become acquainted with the work of two artists who, to me, cry out to be written about together and compared to each other. StephenTalasnik (http://www.stephentalasnik.com) was recently featured by Marsha Mateyka, one of DC's leading art galleries. (www.marshamateykagallery.com).
Dean Byington's paintings are currently on view at the American University Museum at the Katzen Arts Center through March 15th.
Both of the artists create graphically rich, visually spectacular work. They share some similar features, but are also very different, making a comparison very compelling.
My congratulations to Marsha Mateyka for the wonderful Talasnik show in November-December. The exhibition featured both his drawings and sculptures, the latter being large elaborate constructions of match stick-sized pieces of wood. I will focus on the drawings in this discussion (suffice to say I think they leave more to the imagination).
Talasnik's drawings look amazingly like etchings, but in fact are created with pencil and eraser. He seems to work in two basic styles, one of which I would term "biomorphic", the other "architectural." Both involve addition and subtraction: throughout the drawing process, some completed sections are erased, but left partially visible, before a new section is added on top. This technique creates a grayscale and the illusion of additional depth - which combine to create the said "etching" effect.
In the "biomorphic" drawings complex shapes wrapped in membrane-like surfaces interspersed with round holes evoke indeterminate organic forms. A great example of this is "Propeller." (http://www.stephentalasnik.com/drawing_propellor.html) Despite the name, this large drawing, which featured prominently in the show, is a spectacular tour-de-force rendition of a kind of multi-dimensional sea shell. It was the biggest highlight of the exhibition.
The "architectural" drawings feature layer upon layer of complex lattice- and trestlework. They pull in the viewer - I felt I could have spent an hour with each piece. To me, they evoke Piranesi, and, dare I say it, the notebooks of Leonardo. I am always excited to discover artists with a fresh, original vision which nevertheless feels grounded in the past.
The big question that confronted me as I viewed this show was: Is graphic art, no matter how good, the equal of painting (of course I mean painting of the same artistic level)? Or is painting an inherently higher form of artistic expression? Is this even a relevant or important question? It's an issue I've been wrestling with for a long time, and I won't present an apodictic answer here. Needless to say, I deem Talasnik's graphic work to be of exceptional quality.
The Dean Byington exhibition covers the largest part of the American University Museum's second floor galleries. I don't know exactly how these large works are made, but I understand the process includes copying and collaging landscape and architectural elements from old engravings. The result is quite spectacular: Vast multi-tiered landscapes contain fantastic, physically impossible buildings or building-like constructions - they look like oversized engravings with Escheresque elements. While primarily black and white, some of these paintings do contain dashes of colors. There are a few pieces on a non-white, single color background, but I think these are less successful - the color only distracts from the action.
While engaging with this art, I felt the strange sensation of looking at something that was both very old and completely new - 18th century engraving meets 21st century digital technology. And I admired the great effort and craftsmanship expended to create these works. At the same time, the big question that preoccupied me here was: Is this great art, or great illustration? Can it be both? Why not? And: Can one create truly original and cutting edge art by appropriating the old in this manner? One of the joys of good art is that it always raises these kinds of fundamental questions.
As far as comparing the two artists: On the one hand: I think Byington takes Talasnik's themes of space and structure to a whole new level. In terms of the unbounded compositional complexity and visual cornucopia his work is even more exciting. On the other hand: Their work is so different in style in technique that a comparison may not be fair - while Talasnik is outmatched by Byington's show-stopping theatricality, he makes up for it with old-fashioned draughtsmanship combined with the highest level of 21st century artistic intelligence and sensibility: I think the best of Talasnik (such as "Propeller") holds its own when juxtaposed with the best of Byington.
I am grateful to have discovered these two superb artists and will follow their future artistic development.
My Web site: www.marcelgrichter.com
Twitter: www.twitter.com/mgfr2005
No comments:
Post a Comment