Self Portrait
Steven Meinking
Self-Portrait: The Painter And The Supplement
Each brush stroke is a confession, and the confession is rendered through
its apparent attributes. Thus it speaks through the length of its movement,
through the texture of its composition, through the presence of its form.
The presence embodied in each stroke serves as both a pivot and a
dislocation at the same time: a pivot - as it is functionally equivalent to
something else, operating within a shifting structure as a complement to
something other than itself; a dislocation - since it does stand alone, but
only in reference to and as a substitution for something else. This
presence forces one to always look beyond the surface, beyond the
appearance, to a techne operating as a cumulating function.
The supplement is the culmination of this techne which establishes a novel
presence on the basis of its composite accumulation. A new object, as
composition, is created through the organized addition of multiple brush
strokes. This new object is the painting, shaped through the painter's
method which transforms a restricted space into an adjunct exterior and a
substitute for the painter. It is in this regard that I would paint my
self-portrait.
The primary subject of my self-portrait would not be myself. Rather, it
would be a scene of multiple subjects - a bustling intersection with files
of people passing each other at a crosswalk. These people are not the
ordinary people of my other paintings. No, these people are more meaningful
to me. They are the people that I have loved, the people that have shaped
my life. They would be passing each other on the crosswalk, looking forward
with the determination to reach some unknown destination.
In viewing the painting, one would see my mother and father walking
together, my brothers and sister close behind. My lady would be there as
well, along with those relatives and friends whom I hold dear and cherish.
They would all be walking to the right, wearing an assortment of styles
colored in black, their faces and skin painted in rose.
In the other direction, more people would be walking. These would be the
people of my past whom I still remember and whom I credit with helping to
guide me along my way. They too would be dressed in black with faces of
rose.
Behind the bustling foreground, I would have the northern street stretching
off into the horizon, the buildings on the side of the street exhausted in
perspective. On the right side, about three buildings down, would be an
alley. At the opening of the alley would be a fat tom casually watching the
people pass. Just above the tom would be a window, and through the window's
frame one would be able see me, seated by the window under a hanging lamp,
dressed as a harlequin in a costume of rose and yellow, my face tainted with
hues of both blue and rose, cracking a mischievous smile.
- Steven Meinking
Texts and Projects: http://home.earthlink.net/~meinking
"I know of no better aim of life than that of perishing, _animae magnae
prodigus_, in pursuit of the great and the impossible."
- Friedrich Nietzsche, _Untimely Meditations_
r.l. whyte
stay with the surface structure here, but wonder about the pivot, wonder
if it relies too much on a notion of interiority/exteriority which is the
basis for an expressionism.
Fundamentally, I don't think that artists express anything.
You might say that the labor of the brushtroke is intransitive rather than
transitive.
Nevertheless, I'd like to see your painting...
Ryan
Steven Meinking
> I wonder about how the attributes of the brushtrokes speak. I like how you
> stay with the surface structure here, but wonder about the pivot, wonder
> if it relies too much on a notion of interiority/exteriority which is the
> basis for an expressionism.
I remember a time a few years ago when I was ready to abandon any concept of
interiority almost entirely. Now I am willing to accept a certain notion of
interiority as a matter of proximity, as a spatial indicator if you will,
even if the structure in which it is contained is entirely external. The
technique of the brush strokes is completely an external modulation,
however. The pivot designates the function of this modulation.
Of course, the brush strokes "speaking" is a stretch, more of a frolic
really.
> Fundamentally, I don't think that artists express anything.
I think I'm more of a realist than you are, if "realist" is really the
proper term. While the final artistic product may not definitively express
anything, it still embodies the thrust of a technique. I can tell the
difference between a Picasso and a Van Gogh, for instance. That was the
primary motive of my investigation in the text.
> You might say that the labor of the brushtroke is intransitive rather than
> transitive.
Agreed.
> Nevertheless, I'd like to see your painting...
You already did... :-)
It's good to hear from you. Thanks for the input.
Yours,
Steve
Tony Green
multiple brushstrokes"
what is a new object "as composition"?
is this object a form or a figure or a configuration perhaps?
how do you distinguish organized from disorganized multiple brushstrokes?
it seems to me that an organization of brushstrokes is only discernible
when they accumulate to make (possibly to unmake) a figure (or form or
shape) -- however clear or however vague misty & ambiguous -- & that the
kind of analysis you are suggesting (only really of any significance in
european art from, say, Manet, thru the 20th century) might be usefully
kicked along this way
best tony
Steven Meinking
Hello Tony...
> what is a new object "as composition"?
> is this object a form or a figure or a configuration perhaps?
> how do you distinguish organized from disorganized multiple brushstrokes?
>
> it seems to me that an organization of brushstrokes is only discernible
> when they accumulate to make (possibly to unmake) a figure (or form or
> shape) -- however clear or however vague misty & ambiguous --
> & that the kind of analysis you are suggesting (only really of any
significance in
> european art from, say, Manet, thru the 20th century) might be usefully
> kicked along this way
I would not take the text too literally. My intention was not to analyze
anything. All of the material was a contrivance - the first part a more
concept-laden discourse of the self-portrait in contrast to the straight
forward description of the second.
The focus was really intended to explore the movement of technique, to
actually ignore the objects, which partially explains my ambiguity about the
concept of object (since Ryan made a similar point, it might be a good idea
to eliminate the word altogether). I'm much more interested in "composing"
the motion of technique and its supplementarity in presence as a substitute
for something other.
Regarding brush strokes: a painter manipulates the brush strokes; some are
longer, some are shorter, the colors can vary, each maneuver is arbitrary -
this is the extent of organization in technique. Perhaps you have other
ideas?
Good to hear from you as well...
Yours,
Steve
Tony Green
(represented)) objects a kind of (hopefully) pure supplementarity is about
as awkward as texts made up of letters that wd completely eliminate
reference
what has been (& remains) my concern is to recognise that what you are
calling the supplement of technique/ brushstrokes is integral to what is
visible in painting & complicit in "meaning"
pre-Manet & especially in Florentine/Roman/Bolognese painting response to
technique -- which is visible -- has been continually ignored or denied by
criticism & theory at least since the early 18th century because of the
assumption that painting was concerned with the production of beauty (or of
the sublime) meaning the beautiful figures of persons etc & the narrative or
dramatic beauty of a mise-en-scene. Technique consequently has been no more
than the production of a surface transparent to the objects represented. In
his 1939 introduction to iconology Erwin Panofsky specifically denies any
other value to technique. Discussion of painting remains caught between a
kind of fromalism & a kind of iconological explanation -- neither of which
by themnselves are satisfactory -- familiar enough form/content dichotomy,
with the usual discrimination.
It becomes therefore of considerable interest how the values implicit in
technique/brushstroke are reintegrated into thinking about painting -- not
only in our immediate time but in relation to painting anywhere & any time.
The discussion of brushstroke/technique forming represented objects is
particularly piquant in 1640s paintings by Nicolas Poussin, where formal &
iconographical discussions have been sharply (haplessly, hopelessly)
divided.
This structure of thinking about painting is marked in French academic
discourse of the generation after Poussin -- Felibien, notably. However it
is not clearly divided in Poussin's practice, in Bellori's "Lives" or in
the tradition they both knew well, which is that of Philostratus' ekphrases.
There the relation between the production of objects & technique remains
intact.
(This is something that I have been working on (or with) for some years, tho
I havent published much -- so far -- a piece about Philostratus in
"Languages of Design" 3 (1996) 159-167 called "Apollonius of Tyana and art
theory".)
-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Meinking <mein...@earthlink.net>
To: Fiction- Of- Philosophy <fiction-of...@purdue.edu>
morning glory
s whitish mmm skitten
ish furb re ished my mm
other skidding otherly
sheepish ly
so far lost
Steven Meinking
> problem of separation of "technique" from production of figures
> (or forms or (represented)) objects a kind of (hopefully) pure
> supplementarity is about as awkward as texts made up of letters that wd
completely
> eliminate reference
Yes! Although I wouldn't necessarily consider it a "separation" of
technique from production. This is the primary reason why I am exploring
this material fictionally.
> what has been (& remains) my concern is to recognise that what you are
> calling the supplement of technique/ brushstrokes is integral to what is
> visible in painting & complicit in "meaning"
This is definitely relevant, even though I don't pursue it in the text and
really wouldn't know where to start.
Your comments are very interesting, and I consider the ideas to be quite
vital, but with "Self-Portrait," I was not attempting that sort of
definitive enterprise. I don't know enough about art theory to say any such
thing. I was merely meandering, composing, playing painter with words.
I would be interested to read more of your work though...
Yours,
Steve
hassen
just read your post & my how interesting - esp. this:
>>The primary subject of my self-portrait would not be myself. Rather, it
would be a scene of multiple subjects - a bustling intersection with files
of people passing each other at a crosswalk. These people are not the
ordinary people of my other paintings. No, these people are more meaningful
to me. They are the people that I have loved, the people that have shaped
my life. They would be passing each other on the crosswalk, looking forward
with the determination to reach some unknown destination.
<<
for i'm immediately reminded of the following i jotted when living in
chicago, saw the self-/other- portrait in one particular evening out much
like you've mentioned. and re movement, unknown destination, the train was
very much an implied part of my mind's portrait.
h
****************
reflection on viewer
propped my tonal collective males females nonsexed all stilled or teemed
reposition on canvas this father gesture this bent friend each face one may
recognize yet notice they are same in shadow appearing or titanium collars
they whisper from any era annunciate indulgently or for lost cadmium
expressions for frozen crowds hues deep in specific areas light waves of
warm pattern or continuously simple in form one viridian they say vibrates
like nothing else most of these alizarin shades mouths close near the top
and lower left corners with thick raspberry moisture or dry rough textures
those alkyd impasto figures modified pose of fixed concentration chromatism
may be complicated in these areas my son a terre verte breathes reach he may
one day suit umber diffused as my brothers or myself or opaque as the
sidewalk pointer yelling how his diseased life miraculously changed others
slither quickly by or lock arms in transparent dance rough awed she strikes
out chromatic into the water that one may dissolve one day unlike her
niece's frottage or her lover the pale nude in the student's study silver
glaze doors to left suddenly release a cold singing child staggers onto
gradated wooden platform her mother or sister grabs for her hand with face
sturdy tight the moon's fully pale beyond my reflected breath before and
above see my fond strokes have obscured no one form nor my stares nor my
neglect they remain densely curious
1993