Dirty Jobs...and Art

Last night I did something that is not defined under my job description, I washed dishes. I decided to come in at night on my day off at the restaurant and help out in the dishtank. But why, you might ask? Well, I did this for several reasons. We all work for the same goal and that is to blow people away. Sometimes that might just mean taking someone's shift or doing something extra special for a guest. We have a great team of people that I love working with and I wanted to do something that would really blow away my fellow employees. One of co-workers asked me, jokingly that is, to finish his shift in the dishtank. Of course no one wants that job. Rinsing off dirty plates of food, getting sprayed with water from the dishwasher, and handling hot, clean plates is not something appealing to most. After he asked me I realized that it might actually be a good idea to help out in one of the least desired positions in the restaurant.

So, last night I made my way into work to assit in the hot, steamy dishtank. I put on my leather boots, jeans, old t-shirt, and a plastic apron and began washing away. I only worked for about an hour and a half, so I cannot say I completed a whole shift. But, with this experience I have gained a little more respect for those that do the job. It's a fast-paced, dirty, grimy, and nasty job, but someone has to do it! Speaking of dirty jobs, this brings me to another topic: "Waste Land."

I have posted a couple times about the documentary entitled "Waste Land." It is one of my favorite videos that documents artist Vik Muniz's project in Brazil working with the recycling pickers in "Jardim Gramacho," the largest landfill. I have decided to write about this project in order to complete a writing sample for my graduate applications. It had been a little while since seeing the film, so I viewed it for the third time today.

One of the questions I would like to address is how Muniz's work affects those in the film and those that purchase the artwork. In the film, Muniz's wife questions how this project will affect the "catadores" and how they are very fragile human beings. Vik argues that his project will cause them to think in another way by giving them a different perspective. She argues that it might shake them up too much and they might be dissapointed that nothing will improve in their life after this experience. What are your thoughts? Do you think art can really change people?

What about the viewer of the artwork? Muniz sells his first photograph at auction for about $50,000. This tells you that these viewers are definitely not in the same social class as the pickers. Does this bring awareness to the issue in Brazil to other social classes? Is Muniz using the artwork as a mode of transportation in order to reach other social classes? I would love your comments and questions as I begin to write this paper!

But is it a painting?

Artist Wady Guyton next to one of his many paintings.

Dictionary.com defines a painting as a picture or design executed in paints. Does that still ring true today? Many artists have been pushing the boundaries in art for decades now, especially in the medium of painting. Gerhard Ricther used a squeegie, Pollock threw the paint on his canvases, and current-day artist Wady Guyton uses a large-scale printer to create images on linen.

The article about Guyton in the New York Times describes the work of this artist who is displayed throught the US. Guyton's technique is something quite different from the traditional paintbrush and oil pigment. Guyton's studio in Chinatown is filled with Mac computers and the biggest printer Epson makes. He creates images on the computers and prints them onto linen in order to create his "paintings." Guyton welcomes printer mistakes and running out of ink in the middle of a job to create surprise and interest. He enjoys these abstractions just as much as Rothko or Richter would. After looking at his work, the question still remains, should his work be considered painting?

While completing my undergraduate degree in studio art, the question "what is art?" arose on many occasions. Now, not only do we find the need to define art, we question what category it goes in as well. At first glance, one might consider Guyton's work as printmaking. In fact, he is transferring an image onto a porous surface. However, Guyton considers his pieces to be paintings. How can we distinguish the two? What makes a painting a painting and a print a print? Some refer to the action istelf to categorize a painting, such as the movement of a brush or other tool across a surface. We might say that Guyton's painting actually happens on the computer when he is designing the image before it prints out. But what other characteristics cause his work to be painterly?

I hope that after looking at Guyton's work, we question our own theories of art and media. Afterall, we cannot just look at a work first glance anymore and put it into a category such as painting, sculpture, performance, or even drawing. It is exciting to see artists such as Guyton push these boundaries and preset theories in the artworld. What are your thoughts?