Jasper Johns' two trick pony
The priceless Leonardo Da Vinci, sitting Signora Giocondo , holding his paint tools and rag in a cup, 1504
Why is it necessary for artists to incorporate Leonardo Da Vinci' work in their paintings and scuptures? What does it imply? Are you mocking or comparing?
Jasper Johns' sculpture, the light bulb and painter's brushes, 2009
After Milan, so what... Oh sacred oracles of Truth
In this study, I had doubted feinining a work so famous, so interpreted and debated that I wondered could there be anymore added to its mystery. But yet, in this self portrait, I felt lost again as I had with the Michelangelo study to the point I could not see myself. And then, I felt, a (lady) short, plumply, fidgety and excitable to be in the presence of a (master) who she greatly admired. Although my portrait had aged her, this was a hearty character who through her (flirtation), commented on da Vinci's wishy hands, his hooked nose and beautiful teeth. And during the sittings, they laughed, they gossiped.....
And in this moment, the intrigued over her smile may just have been her idiosyncrasies, her underlay of smirks which the painter captured so teasingly, so subtle, resonating her beauty, coy and tempting.
After Jasper Johns' sculpture, The best forgery, light fixture on a block, 2009
My mother's take on this." Nice, a paper weigh, (complete silence) I really regret sending you to art school. you are so talented, why don't you paint carnival instead?"
My aunt, " Boy, if you remove and spoil meh bulb dat working since 1967, ah don't know, I don't know...Ah feeling sick, Lord give meh strength, she would then collapse on the couch.
In the words of the Museum of Contemporary Art in San Diego
" Jasper Johns’ sculptural output informs understanding of his two-dimensional work, A life-size cast of a commonplace object, Light Bulb I is a rephrasing of Marcel Duchamp’s ready-mades. ....the light bulb image became a recurring motif, appearing in various media throughout Johns’s career.
The smooth, industrial form of the bulb is juxtaposed with the hand-manipulated base in which it is nestled, creating a bridge between the gestural expression of Abstract Expressionism and the cool depictions of Pop Art. The underlying subject matter in Johns’s art is not the object represented, but the investigation of how we perceive, label, and categorize objects."After working on the sculpture, if this was cast I wondered, would that make all the different? Is the precess of casting that makes it a work of art? Hence, fakes against originals. All in the spirit of deception.
Pay very close attention to these remarks:
" why is it necessary for artists to incorporate Leonardo Da Vinci' work in their paintings and sculptures? What does it imply? Are you mocking or comparing?"
Why incorporate any work? You would probably answer this best but I'd say that it's a way to explore the mind, the process, the techniques, the milieu, the essence, the audience even, of the artist.
Sometimes, it is simply one creature encountering a creation which he/she finds useful and adopting/adapting it to his/her own needs. Maybe you want to bring to your work the associations surrounding a particular work...maybe it has become iconic and you find it's baggage useful for your project or maybe you want to be iconoclastic and in your work you want to attack and topple its privileged status.
So an artist can do this "borrrowing" with reverence, with the blatant intent to steal, with cynicism, with derision, with undisguised impishness or with a pure curiousity to see what turns out as a result of his/her investigations.
And the results can be enriching, surprising, upsetting, amazing, can allow viewers to see the incorporated work, the original creator and milieu from a different perspective.
WAPnin's interpretation of Bat Dressed As Man (Night). We have to be mindful of representation of that which is, a rose is a rose is a...............
So take my Bat Dressed As Man (Night). I am not an artist and I had no intention of making any statement about any aspect of the original work. I did with that painting what I automatically do with sentences. I reverse them in order to explore alternate perspectives or to discover if they can retain the originally intended meanings. If I hear "God made man in His own image and likeness." I think to myself, "Man made God in his own image and likeness." and I think "This might also be true!" Or, do you remember when you said in an earlier post that you are not free. I thought to myself then, "You are freer than you imagine." And immediately, I found myself rearranging my words and saying "Perhaps you are freed because you can imagine."
So when you introduced me to Doig's "Man Dressed As Bat," I immediately thought, "Man dressed as bat? What would a bat dressed as man against Doig's background look like?" For me it was simply a game, an exploration, and the reason why I deliberately used Doig's background maybe partially answers your question: Associations are portable and can enrich.
You've prompted me to read a bit about Marcel Duchamp and Jasper Johns. Very, very interesting...
"Marcel Duchamp really revolutionized avant-garde art practice by going out to a store, as Johns did, looking for ready-made objects, like a snow shovel, a coat rack, a bottle rack, a urinal, and purchasing them and, then, taking them to the studio and signing them and declaring them to be sculptures." Source
"Bravo!!!", I say.