MANIFESTO

INTRODUCTION
When you eat a steak, how do you eat it? Do you use a fork and knife? What is it that keeps you from submitting to all animal instincts of just grabbing and gobbling? Why do most people in the ‘civilized’ world submit to the ethos of cutlery?
My work explores the mythology and tradition behind anything and everything, including art practice. The most interesting thing about humans is that we’ve developed these elaborate traditions beyond our natural instincts. Religion, tall tales, burial rituals, etiquette, all these things have stemmed and evolved within and without different cultures and belief systems. It is the barrier that we have placed in attempt to put us beyond the rest of the animal kingdom.
Art practice epitomizes one of these traditions. Art does not nourish our bodies; it titillates the mind. It is a free agent, un-tethered to any concrete, black-and-white purpose. Therefore, it is up to the artist to harness art and practice in order to accomplish something. In my case, art is the apparatus for an awakening of consciousness, reevaluation, and exploration.
With that, I have attempted to ‘harness’ and draw lines around art and it’s purpose.


SECTION I.
Art cannot merely be made for the purpose of being beautiful.

[Nature and the world around us serve that purpose. And after all, beauty is in the eye of the beholder (this statement is so fucking cliché but what can you do when a cliché is true?). If the artwork has the intention of being only “beautiful”, then that intention must sit within a greater purpose context.
Example: I’m going to paint these daffodils because I think that they are beautiful.
The argument here is that the daffodils that exist in the realm of reality are already “beautiful” so the poor representation of them would render the artwork useless.
Example: I’m going to intentionally paint these daffodils as an admittance that I can never be close to the real thing and that art, then must serve as more than just a poor replacement of the picture of reality.
Art, then, should fulfill something greater. An agenda, if you will. Art must be a mobile to drive for something, be it social change, awareness, or a ‘call to consciousness’ (Heidegger). ]


SECTION II.
An artist should never be afraid of contradiction.

[To quote Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson:
"Which path do you intend to take, Nell?" said the Constable, sounding very interested. "Conformity or rebellion?"
"Neither one. Both ways are simple-minded — they are only for people who cannot cope with contradiction and ambiguity."
Contradiction, or contradicting oneself, should then be addressed and explored like coming across a tangled web of knots. Thought out, mapped out, and then proceeded to be untangled.]


SECTION III.
Anything cannot be art and anyone is not an artist. Anything can be made into art via the artists’ “hand” and anyone can consciously become an artist.

[Careful with this one. It’s dangerous.
If anything was art, then it would be like saying: sand is money.
Example: There are copious amounts of sand; it is not worth anything because anyone can get it with little to no work. You cannot take sand to a store and purchase a t-shirt with it, therefore rendering it worthless. There is not, however, copious amounts of art. Why? Because good, thought out art, is hard to come by. It requires much more than just placing some ‘thing’ in a gallery claiming that it is art just because you claim you’re an artist.
Now, if one made the conscious decision to become an artist, with the intentions for utilizing artworks as a mobilizer for ideas (see Section I), then does one have the right as an artist to bend the ‘rules’ of art and art making.]


SECTION IV.
If the Artist believes that Art itself is a con, then he must acknowledge that he is a conman, not an artist. The good conman will be able to convince his audience that he is, indeed, and artist.

[It is possible to use the ‘con’ as an artist as a critique and not an actual, habitual ‘con’, unless it’s a performance of course.
In regards to selling art and capitalism, art then is more susceptible to being a ‘scam’. For example, I’d be more inclined to make abstract paintings with an enjoyable palette of colors because I know they will sell. But what can you do when you must feed yourself and make money to continue making work? It is excusable and sometimes commendable to be able to make work within the confines of a market economy.]


SECTION V.
Art has no canon.

[Unless you can group EVERYTHING under a single canon umbrella, then art has a canon.
Example: Some might say that Guy Debord’s “Society of the Spectacle” is a canonical reading. I don’t disagree with that, but Debord’s essay can be just as canonical as Seuss’ Green Eggs and Ham.]


SECTION VI.
Art does not have to be accessible.

[And by accessible, that means to everyone. Here is where intentionality comes into play. Artist intention is of utmost importance.
Example: If an artist intends to make work completely inaccessible as a critique on the inaccessibility of art, then it serves its purpose.
The artist must, however, keep in mind and admit to the fact that he/she will never truly make artwork that is not for an audience. The artist himself cannot negate himself as an audience member.]


SECTION VII.
Humor should never be underrated.

[Fucking laugh a little.
Example: Artist X poops all over a canvas during a performance and then proceeds to swim in his own shit. God, that is really repulsive SLASH hilarious.
Humor is universal. Take that artist stick out of your ass and stop taking yourself so seriously.]


SECTION VIII.
When writing a Manifesto, an artist must never truly believe that the lines or definitions that he or she is drawing within the confines of the manifesto are set in stone.