¿Se puede ser mejor dibujante que pintor? Al menos a mí, me resulta mucho más motivadora la obra gráfica de este joven artista norteamericano.
There is a silent and unformulated argument raging in today's art world: How do we cope with the classical legacy while suddenly seeing it not as a curious but needless relict of "couldn't-care-less-of" times, but as an integral, living and breathing part of our super post-modern reality.
You would not find this question presented to you yet in critical reviews, curatorial notes at the exhibitions, in newspapers or magazines, but nevertheless the debate is clear and present, torturously soul-searching and demanding, probably even much more so because of its unspoken state. In fact, this very debate is defining the otherwise indefinable state of Art today while inevitably shaping the Art of tomorrow. It is the silent underlying current of today's most interesting exhibitions, reviews and articles, as well as of some notable if not regrettable wonderings and metamorphosis of few established names of the art's yesteryears. It is also explicitly evident mode in the drive by an entire new generation of young artists.
Is it possible for the "High" to endure in today's "Art"? Is there a place for the "High Art" in today's society? Is it possible for totally and shockingly none - 20th century art to possess an unbearably expressive and relevant visual statement of today? And how it can look like?
Images and Ideas, not presidents and chairmen, move the world. What are the Ideas that will determine the Images of the 21st century?
If being true to oneself in its entirety is the main criteria for any current movement in art - this is one of possible answers.
Neglected for now by the iron headed main stream art establishment of today's "academy" this newest brand of classical art form finds itself in the strange yet fascinating and inspiring state of true non-conformist movement identical to the position of early modernists at the turn of the last century. (Texto pág web del artista)