Revised Artist's Statement

[Brother Alphabet]

I would like comments on my revised artist's statement...
This can be found also at my new site:

http://www2.netdoor.com/~alphabet/

-------------------------------------------------

About my work...

Since October 1996 I have been exploring the various aspects of Surrealism
through both literary and visual research. Through literary means I have
learned of the ideals of the founders of the Surrealist
movement. More importantly, I have learned that Surrealism was not solely
a historical movement, but that it is a visual force or phenomenon that
existed both before and after the movement itself.

In brief, Surrealism is not just a portion of art history condemned to
dwell in the past. Surrealist methodologies and outlooks apply to modern
creation even more potently than they did in the past. After
careful and continuous study of both Surrealist and psychoanalyitical
resources I have come to the conclusion that Surrealism is the key to
honestly understanding the "within" of humankind. There simply
is no other truly pure method of generating imagery (by "pure" I mean
"free of conscious influence").

None of this is to say that other forms of expression are not genuine or
valid. Surrealist thinking is not for every artist. There still is value
in "realism" as there is in "abstraction". My most important discovery is
that there is no real difference between the two, and furthermore, there
is a central ground.

After all, what are dreams, and what is dreaming? Are dreams real or not
real? What is real? If I imagine myself flying, I am not really flying,
but I am really imagining. So, if I represent myself flying in a
picture, have I represented reality? Yes, of course I have. The
representation of fantasy is the representation of reality not because
what happens in the fantasy is real, but because fantasy itself is real.
So, if I dream that a normally inanimate object sings in a choir and
represent that, I have also represented reality. If I dream of an object
never before seen on earth and represent that, I have again represented
reality. Human ideas are real. There is no rule that insists ideas must be
practical to be useful.

Of course, these things get a little more complex as the ponderings go
freely onward, but before I rant into uselessness I will change
directions. The point of all this as it relates to my work is that I feel
I have reached a level of freedom within which I can comfortably exist.
Some history might be appropriate here.

My journey to this artistic "place" was an uncomfortable ride. The last
large body of work I did ended in 1994 with the group of works I called
"The Microcosm". The series was frought with pretense. I made
extreme efforts to force "meaning" into my work and therefore onto the
viewing public. The result, in the end, was that "meaning" turned out to
be flexible. By the time the exhibition of the series took place, I had
already begun to sense the utter futility of "definition". Regardless of
what I wanted my work to mean, people still saw what they wanted to see. I
went so far as to post title cards which read "In this work you
see..." and I watched the reactions of the people to the remarks on the
cards. Some people accpeted the listed definitions. Others flatly denied
the meanings, or argued with them. Some even confronted me about
the meanings, asking "Why can't it mean such-and-such instead?" Overall,
that experience began to change my outlook.

Stylistically, the work from the Microcosm series also began to influence
my subsequent images. To this day, I still use objects or atmospheres
originally created in the Microcosm work. A number of people
remarked to me that I was making "Surrealist" images. These remarks were
usually not coming from a vantage point of knowledge. Instead, people
would say things like "This is really surreal" as if to describe a
style rather than an objective. Nevertheless, these comments urged me to
investigate further.

Even before the Microcosm was begun, I was an admirer of artists such as
Rene Magritte, Joan Miro, Yves Tanguy, Max Ernst and Georgio deChirico. I
had even been so fortunate as to view over 200 Magritte works in person,
as well as a number of Miro and Ernst paintings. The Surrealist movement
was one of my favorites above all but Cubism at the time. After the
exhibition of the Microcosm, and specifically after hearing from a number
of people who had attended the show, I became more and more
curious about what was behind the scenes of Surrealism.

Stylistically, I am most influenced by Magritte's ideals, Tanguy's sense
of space, deChirico's treatment of form, and Miro's curious subject
matter. Secondary to these, Ernst's textures are also occasionally
influential. The use of collage by a number of the above artists is also
important to me (This is not so much apparent in my current work, but in
most of the Microcosm works).

All of the above experiences combined with the powerful stylistic
influences of a number of the Surrealist masters have combined within me
to enhance my journey. This journey is one that can only be traced by
looking backwards to the trail I have walked. I have no idea where it will
take me. My only hope is that it will take me closer to the "place" where
the gap between the mind and the canvas is paper-thin.

I greatly appreciate your taking the time to read this statement. Please
contact me to find out more about
my work.

Jason A. Hutto
August 25, 1998

-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-
"I paint what I think, not what I see..." - Pablo Picasso
"You're not the boss of me!..." - J. A. Hutto (Pre age 3)
http://www2.msstate.edu/~jah10 + ja...@ra.msstate.edu