Two Great Artist Bio Movies: "Frida" and "Basquiat"

Not too long ago I watched the movie Frida, about the artist Frida Kahlo. The way in which it totally enveloped you into the artist's daily life and surroundings with it's geniune feeling scenery and cast, reminded me of the also great artist-biography movie Basquiat about Jean-Michel Basquait. Two great movies with one word titles about two great artists, one from Mexico active in the 1920's and 30's and one from New York in the 1980's. It's nice to see such well made depictions of the artists' life, for those that are interested I've included my short reviews of both movies below. First is Frida:

I knew the basic history about Mexican artist Frida Kahlo, her work and the relationship with the communist leaning Diego Rivera, but seeing the story displayed in front of you with great actors really helped me to understand her work in a way that I could not have before. Salma Hayek does a great job of portraying Kahlo. Good actors will go out of their way to find roles that challenge them and help break the type-cast mold in which they might have found themselves, and that's exactly what this role did for Hayek. 

The history behind the whole thing is amazing, two avant-garde (at the time) Mexican artists who have dangerous political views exhibit their work around the world while having a torrid and confusing love affair, and hiding political refugees at their estate.

"They are so damn 'intellectual' and rotten that I can't stand them anymore... I would rather sit on the floor in the market of Toluca and sell tortillas, than have anything to do with those artistic bitches of Paris."

 -Frida Kahlo

 I mean you couldn't write this kind of stuff. It's stories like this that really keep me coming back to art history as a valuable resource for understanding cultures and people. Alfred Molina does an amazing job portraying the gregarious and larger than life Diego Rivera. Hayek was good, and Molina was amazing ( I hate to say that because in the story Rivera is so mean to Frida).

Now leap forward and northward about 50 years... to Basquiat. Directed by Julian Schnabel, himself a painter who has connections to the 1980's art scene which the movie depicts brilliantly. Jeffrey Wright gives an eerily dead-on performance as the young genius painter Jean-Michel Basquiat. I mean you watch old documentaries or bits of interviews or videos with Jean-Michel, and you watch the movie and Wright's performance is so dead on it's very scary. Wright should of won best actor easily for this role. David Bowie plays Andy Warhol to a tee, Dennis Hopper is awesome, Gary Oldman, Benicio Del Toro, the whole cast is incredible. No movie I have ever seen captures a time and place and the people so perfectly, how they did it is beyond me.

"I don't think the stereotype of the artist in the studio quietly working is really true anymore. There's always photographers coming through the studio and stuff like this. There is a lot more of daily life that is sort of documented and put out there,  ...if you go to a restaurant they write about it in the Post on page six."

-Jean-Michel Basquait (from a 1986 interview)

I think it's clear that by 1986 Basquiat had lost some of his rebelliousness and innocence and was using the artworld has much as it was using him. Unfortunately for him, it's my opinion that he was too far gone into trying to please everyone else and not himself at this point. Not too disimalar to what happend to another  young genius African American artist that was exploited to some extent - Jimi Hendrix.

I am not saying one doesn't take responsibility for their own actions, decisions, and life, they absolutely should of course. But to say there wasn't many people surrounding both of these artists who were making money off of them with no interest in the person behind the art, and pushing them farther into personal chaos,  is to be naive. Maybe it's not a racial thing - these two artists being exploited; there were also many  other artists that were exploited, especially musical artist's during Hendrix's time. In Basquiat's case he had a very troubled childhood supposedly where he claimed he was beaten by his father, he ran away from home in his late teens and lived on the streets of New York. With no true direction other than his crayon, his spray can, his pencil, his brush guiding him.

It's unfortunate that he didn't have anyone around him who was able to help him get the personal help he needed. Which goes my back to my last post about Andy Warhol, or specifically this one from a year or so ago: Andy Warhol. Many deaths of artists happened around Warhol. In the linked post, it describes Warhol's own thoughts on this. If I understand his sentiment right, he says that he didn't encourage anyone around him into destructive behavior and tried to talk them out of it to what extent he could, but said that if people want to destroy themselves they will. I firmly believe that's true, but also that to just stand by and watch it happen while you make money off of your art-collaboration with the man destroying himself (Warhol and Basquiat) that's not exactly innocent either. I want to end with the note that I do firmly believe that Warhol wanted the best for everyone around him and not the opposite.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Mexican Artist Frida Kahlo's Birthday Honored on Google Homepage, Actress Salma Hayek on the Making of 2002 "Frida" Biopic (video) (frugal-cafe.com)
• Happy Birthday, Frida Kahlo (Biography and Art) (nowpublic.com)

Good Business is the Best Art

No, it's not a statement that I necessarily believe in, or one that I believe even Andy Warhol (the artist I am quoting) totally believed in. I came across news of an exhibition ("Andy Warhol Enterprises") at the Indianapolis Museum of Art in October later this year (2010), that features Andy Warhol's work in relation to his commercial art background. A background that carried directly over to his later work in many ways, whether it's his pop-art paintings, his factory-studio movies and projects, his band promoting, or his publishing.

"Good Business is the Best Art"
-Andy Warhol

Art and business are subjects that are often found together - this is an idea behind much of Warhol's work. I think he was tapping into that exploitive, dumbed down, quick version of popular culture that we are especially seeing now in the 21st century, while at the same time cashing in on it, creating and or predicting it. Warning us of our future cultural doom while at the same time having a hand in it's invention. 

Some quick thoughts off the top of my head about money and art are that on some level it's easy to be commercial, and I am not necessarily saying that Warhol's work is shallow, but some might see it that way. For example - I could paint puppy dogs or cottages in the woods or whatnot and I could sell some paintings consistently no question in my mind. I would not only not want to do that idealistically, but if I had to starve I still would not be up for that. 

But on a different level, maybe your current work is ideally what you would want to do but it has no commercial appeal whatsover. Then you have to ask yourself  - are you happy doing your art for yourself on your own time and not as a way to make money? If this is an option, that's not a bad thing of course. Without any commercial appeal though, that could mean that other people don't even dig your work on any kind of aesthetic level, which is kind of a general bummer, right?

I mean speaking for myself, I really get off on seeing people's reaction to my work, I want to interact with them and talk about it, maybe sometimes even if it's not a positive experience at first. Good art to me should have some kind of attractive quality to it, something that draws me in, the work needs to stand on it's own visually and appeal to me somehow. And even if one person digs it, that usually means that marketed well enough you could achieve some level of commercial success. And success can be defined not just in making money selling your art, but in sharing it and growing an audience for it. Even if it's only the latter you're after, if you want to be successful, good marketing is essential and Warhol was a master of it.

On another level my own experience is similar to Warhol's (except for the part about being hugely famous and successful). Similar in respect to the fact that I stumbled into picture framing as a young man and worked full time in that field for more than several years. I learned sales skills, attention to detail, excellent craftsmanship, color and composition theory on daily basis, amongst many other things; many of the skills I imagine that Warhol learned in his early years as a graphic designer. If your are lucky enough to have a craft or skill that is close to what you ideally want to do, this can be a great thing. Some artists shy away from the marketing or commercial aspect of the job, but for my money, the more you know and do the better you're chances are. 

The Andy Warhol Enterprises exhibition will feature many items from the Andy Warhol Museum in Pittsburgh, PA. I saw that museum when when I lived in the 'Burgh, and the visit is one of my most vivid memories of that city. The silver pillow room is awesome if you are ever near there and are able to go. I gained a tremendous amount more of respect for Warhol and his work after seeing this museum. Although after much thought on the subject over the years; I still disagree with some of the basic philosophy of art that Warhol maintained throughout his work, (blending the line between pop culture and art, exposing/exploiting this fact has a basis for all his work). His work is important however you want to look at it  and I think the debates that his work presents to us, are ones that deserve to be examined over and over again, which Warhol's work allows us to do.

Working At Being an Artist

It's been a few weeks since I last posted, sorry about that readers. I guess you could say I have been uninspired, at least with my writing. I have been working on some pen and ink and colored pencil drawings, maybe I'll preview some of those in the coming days.

Let's talk about creative inspiration. A common idea in talk of and by artist's, writers, musicians, etc., is that notion that creativity comes in spurts, that you must get on a roll, ride the wave, get in the flow or whatever; you know what I mean. But does that have to be the case? I say no, not at all. Although my lack of writing this month I attribute to being uninspired, maybe I am just being lazy. Aren't successful artists the ones who are at least somewhat regimented with a discipline of creating every single day for at least several hours if not 8-10 hours or more (ideally)?

"Why do people think artists are special? It's just another job."
Andy Warhol (1928-87)

Warhol is right on with this quote, at least for me, - painting and drawing is not all bliss and vision and inspiration. I do believe that there is a kind of creative cycle or tide that comes in and leaves, absolutely, it's hard to deny that. But what about continuing to create when the inspirational tide goes out to sea again? Sometimes I don't feel like even looking at paper or pencils, paints, computers or anything, but to be successful one must get past this right? We create because we are passionate about the work obviously, and you don't want to force anything, but at the same time I definitely could more disciplined in my creative endeavors.

Maybe the key is changing things up when you feel that block. When I'm not painting I could be photographing, then publishing and writing online, then networking, and when the tide comes back in I'm ready to paint. By focusing on different aspects involved in being an artist maybe it's possible to kind of cycle those processes into working on something every day.

Andy Warhol on His Image

This quote from Warhol sheds a little bit of light on the meaning behind his image and art. Although his message is glaringly obvious with paintings like his Campbell's Soup collection. The idea being the cans represent the processed, homogenous food coming from a factory etc., and being a statement on American lifestyles.

"My image is a statement of the symbols of the harsh, impersonal products and brash materialistic objects on which America is built today. It is a projection of everything that can be bought and sold, and practical but impermanent symbols that sustain us."

-Andy Warhol

It is my opinion though, that his message was more observation than critcism, he being more of a kind of prophet of the modern era, than someone who is warning us. He indulged in many different aspects of American culture and loved all of it.

Andy Warhol On Accusations of Being Evil

I find this quote a fascinating insight into the life of Andy Warhol. The heyday of his famous Factory studio was quite an amazing scene, with Warhol filming and recording the whole thing. He redefined what it meant to be an artist, and the criticism that he used people for his own ends, is a valid one, but I think he answers that well here:

"Now and then someone would accuse me of being evil--of letting people destroy themselves while I watched, just so I could film them and tape record them, but I don't think of myself as evil--just realistic. I learned when I was little that whenever I got aggressive and tried to tell someone what to do, nothing happened--I just couldn't carry it off. I learned that you actually have more power when you shut up, because at least that way people will start maybe to doubt themselves. When people are ready to, they change. They never do it before then, and sometimes they die before they get around to it..."

(Andy Warhol, POPism, p.269 Basquiat, A Quick Killing In Art.)

He wasn't preaching to or pushing anyone, just letting them be themselves. The fact does remain though that there were more than a few life and death incidents indirectly and directly related to Andy Warhol and his involvement with other artists.