I want to sit down to some critiques every now and then.  I want to talk about the work of David Flood, a “sculptor’” from Massachusetts.

I use “sculptor” in the connotation of quotations because David is more of a seeker than a sculptor.  These pieces of worn wood are reflections of mother natures accidents rather than an artists ambitions.  He does use vegetable or mineral oil to bring out desirable attributes however again it is not the whims of the artist that matters most here. However, as it were, there are moments where you can see that the artist has manipulated the wood.  Others, are completely natural.  It is those ‘others’ that make me uncomfortable.  It is as simple as seeking a worn street sign or a decaying piece of road kill.
That being said, I think it is obvious that the seeker element of David is right on point.  His eye for natural beauty is one that is keen on artistic spirituality.   Whereas I dislike the word ‘artist’ being associated with the word ’seeker’, it matters not.  Regardless of what chisel work goes into a piece it is only a subtle manipulation of what nature has made.  And this is OK.
I applaud Davids finds and alterations.  I believe them to be absolutely worthwhile and simply gorgeous to look at.  After taking the time to review his collection and seeing his work in person in the past, I cannot help but associate his work with that of sculptor Isamu Noguchi.  It is of a far different medium and spiritual overtone but it is in fact spiritual.  A naturalist, pacifist take on fine art.  However, I am always weary on giving too much praise to an individual largely seeking beautiful objects.  Whereas they are in fact beautiful, they are often not the work of the artist.

My recent book is receiving quite a bit of press recently, featured on Art Nouveau Magazine, Digital City, AllVoices, Disinformation and the Big Art Blog.   I also recently received a request from the ‘largest art publication in the country’ to review the book.

Here is your chance to pick up a FREE copy of the ebook version.  Just Email info@artisdeadbook.com with the subject line ‘Free’ and you will be entered to win.

The winner will be chosen on November 15th!

Out of full-on boredom I thought I would list my favorite artists in the nutmeg state (Connecticut). This list changes quite a bit but these are my top artists as of right now. So no need to go searching for the best artists in Connecticut… Here they are!

Ethan Boisvert

Guido Garaycochea

Jacob Pongratz

‘Sketch’

Robert Perless

Dave Estes

Janet Lage

Balam Soto

Mike Detelj

Frank Bruckmann

Lawrence Morelli

Nancy Eisenfeld

Jane Harris

Amber Maida

Gary Jacobs

Tomoko Abe

Jane Rainwater

Dawn Rudd

Ronnie Rysz

Rashmi Talpade

Rita Brieger

Caitlin Corbin

Geoffrey Detrani

Paul Duda

Leif Nilsson

Michael Galaburri

Carolina Marquez-Sterling

OsirisOrion

Jessica Bajoros

Michael Raleigh

Got any more suggestions?

Well the book release and solo exhibition was a wonderful success. My book is now available at Artoholic Publishing.

Here are some images from the event:

I want to announce that my opening at the Tunxis CC gallery will also be the release of my book on October 14th from 4-7pm. The gallery is located in Farmington, CT and you can find directions here.

If you are unfamiliar with the school, park in the massive student lot (can’t miss it). As you face the campus, the library is on the left side. Walk past the library and enter through doors that line up with the library on the opposite side. The gallery is on your right when you enter. Hope to see many of you there!

So I have been asked by when my next show is. Well, it will be at the Tunxis Community College gallery on Wednesday, October 14th and will be up for about a month. The opening is on the 14th from 4-7pm.

I am happy to announce a rather spectacular new series that are based off of Negative One. This show will feature 7 of these mixed sculptures with the largest being 80″x60″. Pictures of the opening and of the new work will be posted shortly after the opening.

Also the other works in the Connecticut Series are now live and online.

Almost a month away from my books release and I thought I would reflect a bit on the wild ride that is self-publishing. First off, like most authors, I did in fact think that my work was good enough to be bought by traditional publishers. However instead of going through the painfully long process of trying to be picked up by these companies I decided early on that the message needed to be told now.

So the research began. Where do I self-publish and who is best? I looked into all the big companies.. LuLu, IUniverse etc. After doing my due diligence I realized that these companies were about one thing – initial profit made from authors investments. Their marketing packages were a joke. They would send you business cards and put you on Amazon and B&N.com. The only plans that were any good were the ones that cost thousands of dollars and even then they seemed flimsy. This is an important book. It is not an authors fiction novel dream, I am an artist not an author. But the subject NEEDS to be expressed and talked about. I can’t rely on weak-marketing, how else will I get the word out?

Slowly moving away from these companies I got a referral to an individual from a friend. She had been in traditional publishing for years and was starting her own self-publishing company. She had great ideas and sounded infinitely excited to get started. I put my faith in this option and had an agreement with her months before the release date. She would handle the editing and marketing, with a big exclamation point on marketing. Well after months of her dissappearing and re-appearing I found myself at our pre-sale day with no edited book and no word from her for weeks before. Needless to say I was out $700 and she would not answer my calls or emails. Stressed out and upset I knew my lesson was learned.

I finally got fed up and realized that all of these self-publishing companies were just middle-men between you and the printer. Essentially, you were paying them to send your information to the printer. Well after making up my mind I decided that I would handle everything. I have some business background and whereas I don’t know too much about publishing/distributing books, I do have my feet planted in the art world. I figured that was a start.

So I got a great contact and picked up a fellow professor to handle my editing. I also found a fantastic printer which had lots of positive feedback tied to it. After this ray of sunshine I started the website and starting marketing the book. This was going well. People were starting to pay attention to the book and the momentum started to build. I then realized that I would need to have a company tied to the sales of the book so that uncle Sam doesn’t chop my hands off. So I began Artoholic Publishing, LLC which will handle all my marketing/distributing/selling. I may even take on other art-related books in the future…

So it is one month before my books release and I have full control. Sure, I don’t feel as confident in the scope of the book as I once did and this certainly makes me more busy. However after jumping into the self-publishing world I can at least feel at ease that I won’t screw myself.

Here is the link to a recent interview I did for Art Nouveau Magazine. http://artnouveaumagazine.com/blog5/2009/09/11/art-is-dead-an-interview-with-artist-author-ted-mikulski/

There are quite a bit of interviews and book reviews on the horizon and I will have those posted as well. On a side note I just recently completed my ‘Connecticut Series’ which is based off of a 8′x4′ painting I did for a show at Left Bank Gallery in Essex. Here is a smaller work out of the series entitled ‘CT Series #05/06′:

2-6 of the series will be on display at the Left Bank Gallery until September 30th.

I wanted to give all of those who may be interested in the upcoming book ‘Art Is Dead’ a small excerpt from one portion of the book.  If you are re-publishing this somewhere like a blog or online publication please use proper citing.  Visit artisdeadbook.com to learn more about the book, see video interviews, meet the contributors, and pre-order the book!

“When poker boomed in the early 2000’s, we saw a rise in poker players becoming celebrities.  Gamblers that are in many ways interesting and strange made their way to the top of the field and are now household names.  These were everyday average people who happened to love poker and possibly have a gambling addiction.  They were very loose with their money which made it fun to watch when they lost a large chunk of it.  Generally though, they were just like everyone else.  Society could easily relate to these players.  One reason is because the game of poker is easily understood and in many ways respected for those who are talented at it.  Another reason is that these characters are making large quantities of money and therefore we as on-lookers are envious, but admiring, of their success.

So, strange characters making a lot of money.  Sounds a lot like contemporary art.  The only difference is the ability to understand what is being done, and to relate to the characters.  If people could understand why a bag of garbage is worth several thousand dollars and considered to be brilliant art, perhaps living artists would begin to be household names.  Or perhaps that bag of garbage should never have been accepted as brilliant art in the first place.

Not everyone in the art world agrees that bags of garbage should treated as amazing art.  The debate over modern self-expression has raged on for decades.  Today we accept splatters of paint and abstract concepts as art but this was not always so.  The modern debate began in the 1940s when abstraction expressionism hit the art scene, but it was really sparked by the debate between Clement Greenberg and Harold Rosenberg.  Both were relatable to be the Ebert and Ropert of art critics in their day.  They had severely different opinions on art becoming something that anyone could do.  Greenberg argued that abstract expressionism should be praised.  That it involved the spirit and emotions of the artists instead of a simple picture for recognitions sake.  Rosenberg on the other hand fiercely opposed the idea that art could be dubbed down into simple mindless actions.  Seen only for the result of the action and not for the image that was intended to be painted.   This opposition was to the likings of Ali and Frazier.  Two heavy weights who in many ways would shape the future of modern art.
Perhaps that previous statement is a bit bold.  I am not sure anyone besides the artists could have stopped the direction art was going.  Needless to say, the likes of abstract expressionism won the fight and Greenberg knocked down Rosenberg.  This meant that many forms of art would begin to separate themselves from what had always been traditionally known as ‘art’.  In otherwords, classical painting and sculpting.   It was a great thing for people who liked to express themselves and for all visual artists in general.  Suddenly you could put feces into a jar and call it art (See artist Piero Manzoni).  However for everyone else that was not involved with art, it left a bad taste in their mouth, which thankfully had little to do with the previously mentioned feces.  Suddenly anything was possible and anything could potentially be considered to be incredible by its very concept.  Since concept had trumped product, those with an inability to grasp said concept were left out in the cold.  Product is far easier to appreciate and understand.  It is what America has been built upon.  A painting of an elephant for instance is easy to see and appreciate it as being an elephant.  You can see how detailed it is, what setting it is placed in and you can understand the whys and whats.  Granted, it does not go beyond the original image in terms of concept but it really doesn’t need to.  However, a large granite cube representing the strength and size of an elephant is far more difficult for the average person to appreciate through concept.  Instead, it is often met with disgust and subsequently a turn away from art altogether.  Perhaps as artists we never educated society properly, or the transition to the modern art movement was too fast.  I think neither are true.  Instead this art by its very nature is contrary to what society would rationalize as appreciative.  It lacks universal definition and without definition it stays an ‘it’.

It boils down to understanding and recognition.  Many artists would argue that forcing their work to be recognizable or understandable in a universal way is a fallacy and that art is whatever the artist wants it to be.  Thank god there are other artists out there to agree with you.  For everyone else, being able to recognize what they are looking at is something that is key to appreciating and admiring the work.  Next comes understanding, which can be separated from recognition but only if the concept is very obvious. Or unless you are speaking with the artist who can explain the concept.  Gallery goers often have fun going to exhibits and figuring out concepts but then again I am speaking to the general public, not gallery goers.  It is the artists who bridge the gap between understanding and recognition in their work that can be truly appreciated by society as a whole.  That is not to say that the other work is not valuable or worthwhile but it tends to cater to only one crowd.  The art crowd.  Which many would argue is good enough.  However I say that is simply not good enough.  Why should only one crowd be able to understand and partake in something that is public?  Perhaps if conceptual art were taught right alongside the classical masters, kids would grow up to universally appreciate art which is not outwardly understandable or recognizable.   The actual art that is considered to be truly ‘abstract’ should not go away, but instead should begin to be universally taught and thus, appreciated.”

Promotional video for my upcoming book ‘Art Is Dead’.  Visit artisdeadbook.com to join the discussion and learn more about the project.  Music by Martin Ear, video assisting by Mike Detelj.