Explanations; CREATE

And we're back...

This is becoming a regular thing, isn't it?

Anyway.

Thought I'd come back, maybe give you a little something.

I call myself an artist.
But I don't believe it - in the traditional sense.

     Sure, I can draw. I also enjoy painting quite a lot. I play (badly) the guitar, bass, and drums. I love singing... and I also enjoy writing.
I've tried short stories, novels, etc. I never get very far because I can't stay focused on any one thing for more than a few days (If I'm lucky). It's why I paint so quickly - I usually start and finish a painting in one go, but lately I've been purposefully stretching that out over a few nights and I find it incredibly difficult.
One area of "art" that I feel comfortable creating in is "poetry".

     Now, I'm not a great poet - I'm not even a good poet - but I enjoy it.
My poems aren't really "poems" per se. They don't, usually, rhyme as I find rhyming poems to be pedantic at best.
My writings are more "stream of consciousness" (which, as far as I'm concerned means "drivel written by idiots").
However,"Stream of consciousness" (SoC) isn't exactly right either. I know what I'm writing and it is very purposeful, but my "poems" read like they are "SoC", so that's what we'll call them.

     What they are, in reality, are carefully abstracted thoughts that I choose to express in much the same way I would express something visually.
Painting, in the abstract, is about seeing things in your own way, in your own context, and divorced - somewhat - from reality.
     I use words like I would use paint. It's about creating an idea or image in the mind's eye; a feeling or series of feelings meant to convey a message. I don't care if it's written "correctly" or if I follow the "rules". Art isn't about rules.

     For example, I've always felt that "photo realistic" art was boring. It's technically masterful, but boring. If i wanted a photo realistic image of something, I'd take a photo.
I could write "traditional" poems, but I don't see the point. To me, it's like someone knowing all of the rules of writing and grammar - Sure, they can write well from a technical standpoint, but that doesn't mean what they are writing is any good.
     Think of it this way: You could learn everything there is to know about playing the piano. you could study for years and years and become a master of the instrument. However, that does not mean that you automatically write great music. In fact, you might write terrible music that no one likes.
     While I appreciate the technical prowess and ability, it lacks that "spark" and that spark is something inside you. You either have it or you don't.
So, while you might be an amazing pianist, you aren't truly expressing that spark.

     In all, I'm more interested in how an artist sees the world around them and how they express that vision. I want to see that spark.

     Part of why I don't consider myself a "traditional" artist - and at the same time do -  is my lack of education.
I didn't go to art school. I didn't take art classes (other than the required high school courses - which taught me nothing.) My "talent" comes naturally from a lifetime of doing it.
I was born with a spark.

     I've been drawing since I could hold a pencil and was encouraged by my family (in particular my father). It's been my defining trait (intellectually) for the past 30 years. It's who I am.
That, however, is at odds with how I perceive myself.
Because of the way in which artists and the arts are perceived by the world, I feel like a phony - a pretender. Every time I say "I'm an artist" I feel like I'm lying. It's a sort of "Cognitive dissonance". I see myself as an artist, yet feel outside of that world; a Persona Non Grata.
I will, at best, be considered "outsider".

     I try to fight that feeling. It can easily put one off of art - and I think it does. It makes people with desire and natural talent, who happen not to have the advantage of a degree or connections, feel as if they don't belong. It can make one feel as if they aren't really an artist or that they have no business even trying.

     I don't buy into the "art world" and it's bullshit; Phony Artist statements, the self-serving critics, the "deeper meaning" of work (when there isn't one) that people discuss over champagne, the supposed monetary value of work, etc.
A wall has been built between your average person and "The Art World". It's a club with a very discerning membership.
That is the work of people.
     People like to feel special. They want to "get it" and like to keep their club exclusive. That's why you get "Real" art being priced in the thousands of dollars (or much much more). no ordinary person can afford that.
Art has been co-opted by the "elite" and if you aren't part of that world then you never will be welcomed in. - that is unless, of course, you get very very lucky and one of these people deems you worthy.
It's a world of pretension. It's a world of who you know.
     I've met my share of artists and collectors who revel in that scene. Whether they truly believe their own bullshit is up for debate, but it has caused a great divide between "Art" and art.
It's a world where one needs a degree to be taken seriously or even given a chance.

     Art has become a commodity. You can get a degree in business, computers, criminal justice... and Art.
It fails to address the truth of what art is and why we are driven to create.
It was never a means to an end. Art isn't about making a living. Art isn't about selling your work. Art isn't about being famous or rubbing elbows with the elite.

     No, I don't have a degree. Does that means I'm not an artist? Does that diminish my work? Does that, truly, make me an outsider? Or are the outsiders those people who are "technically proficient" but have no spark or can't express it? I believe art cannot be defined. Nor can art be an exclusive club. It belongs to each of us.

     People have seen my work and said "I love it! It's amazing! did you go to art school? No? you should!"
Why should I? What difference would that make? So i can get a job doing it? Maybe be a graphic designer? i can go to school and use my art to make a fortune? Is that what it's about? That is the end I'm trying to achieve? "Forget creating. Forget what art means to you... what it IS. You should be making money!" "i don't know why you aren't RICH." "You should be doing this professionally!"

     Those sort of sentiments irk me. They belittle art and the artist. It cheapens art and makes it another means to an end.

     I've been told by friends that went to art school that it "kills" their creativity.
I was told, also, that I shouldn't go to school for it.
While it teaches you how to do many things, it also creates a "prison" that one finds hard to break free of. That is a prison made of expectation, rules, and the "correct" way of doing things.
In my opinion there is no "right" way of creating art.
While I'm talking in very broad terms, I feel there is a certain core truth here.
If there were no schools, no degrees, would art be any less for it? Would there be no artists? Would we not create?

     My favorite art is always that done by people without any formal training or education, whether it be the art children make that we put on the fridge, or the adult saying "I can't do it" and creating interesting, different, and wholly natural pieces devoid of the trappings of said "formal" training and education.
These pieces are the closest to what art truly is. It's natural expression. It's how someone sees their world.

     If I choose to paint a certain way, is that wrong? Who says what is "good" or "bad"? Who gets to make that choice? Why do i have to do it a certain way? Why is that correct?

     We, as a species, have been creating art since the beginning of time in some form or another.
Look at cave paintings. Look at idolatry from 10,000 years ago (or more). This is something inherent in our make-up. If anything defines us as a species, it's our ability and desire to create art. It sets us apart from the animals. It is, in many ways, the one true human characteristic.
Art is everywhere. It's in cave paintings, in tools, in construction, clothing, food, thought, feeling...
Our existence is defined by art.

Art is natural. It's inside of all of us. Some of us choose or are able to express that art to varying degrees. That's what I feel I am doing. Art is a part of my being - I have to do it.

When one makes art "definitive" and seeks to give it boundaries and rules, it ceases to be art. It becomes another technical function of our motor skills.

     To me, art is not about money, or being technically proficient. Art is what it is; Art for Art's sake.
It exists outside of galleries and museums. It has no intrinsic monetary value. It is expression, pure and simple. That is how I choose to express myself, for better or worse.

So, i might not be the "best" artist or even an "artist" at all in the academic sense, but I have a passion and need to create that goes beyond some degree, price, or recognition.

     If i were alone on a deserted Island, I'd still be creating art.
I don't do it for anyone else - and that's probably why I find it difficult to sell my work or price it for that matter. I don't create for the World. I breathe, my heart beats, I create.

     I do get feel good knowing people enjoy it, but that is not the end all be all. I don't care if I sell my work or if anyone wants to buy it. Those things are fantastic, and I'm happy people can appreciate it, but if they didn't it wouldn't matter.
Art is my expression, my escape, my drive, my need, my want, my desire, my reality...

That is why I call myself an artist.








A poem:

"Killing Time"

Leather Jodie filters.

Weight and spring.

Wander lots; lost -

none too steady.

Salty beds traced,

ruler doubled over.

drops leaning signal,

built Roman candles

-S.P.

I made him LAUGH: Small Potatoes

'Ello again, mates!

(yes, too much English slang and such.)

Back once again (more and more frequent I am!)

Just wanted to share this bit of nonsense:

If you haven't watched Ricky Gervais' new show 'Derek' then you're an idiot.
It's brilliant work and his BEST by far.
As i tend to do, I have done a bit of fan art work for the show.

A few pieces have turned up on the 'Derek' fan-site tadpolehitler.com

But THIS made my day:

Ricky tweeted the above to his billions (check that) followers... and guess who made that?

ME.

Yes, I am tooting my own horn and patting myself on the (very large) back, but so what? Can't I have just a BIT of happiness for ONCE in my rotten life? Geez.

I'll update some more later. I've got other things i want to share. Just thought i'd share this first.

Until next time,

SP

The Death of Geek Culture

Howdy, pardners...

Back again
(what? It HASN'T been six months?)

Just wanted this bit o' writing I did to find a happy home outside of a comment section.

Now, in case you hadn't noticed, I tend to be long-winded.
With that in mind, please check this out if you have a few hours to spare.

Cracked.com - one of my favorite sites - had an article up about the awful "fast food" television programming of the CW channel.

It's was a fun little read, but it also gave me an opportunity to say something I have been thinking about for some time now.

This "comment" comes with a disclaimer, of sorts, at the boot, explaining why it's so "sloppy".

Here, first, is the link to the article in question, from writer Soren Bowie, titled "4 Shows the CW Network Should Absolutely Make Next" :

http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-shows-cw-network-should-absolutely-make-next/

and then my response to said article:


This is the fault of one series: Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

And, if you hadn't considered this point, take a moment to chew on it:
This wave we've all been riding for the last couple of few years (colloquialism); The "Geeks are cool" wave, is going to first crest and then crash upon the rocks of majority culture.
For whatever reasons - and they are numerous - Geeks have finally been free to be, well, geeks.
It's celebrated. No longer are you an outcast for reading comic books, or liking star Trek.
Geeks are "cool".
Somewhere along the line popular culture shifted in favor of the geeks. What once cause one to be marginalized or ostracized has become par for the course.
"What, you HAVEN'T read 100 bullets? You don't watch The Walking Dead? You don't think wil Wheaton is the messiah?"

The problem here is, like anything else that finds itself hanging ten on the Tidal wave, at some point it all comes to an end. The tide flows back out.
Nothing lasts forever - or, to keep with the pop culture motif "Nothing gold can stay".
There will be a backlash against "Geek culture". Mark my words.
If you pay close enough attention you can see it happening even now.
Society reaches a saturation point and once it's crossed there is no going back.
This article, in a way, is it's emissary.
Now, don't get me wrong. I am not defending CW or it's terrible programming. But we have only ourselves to blame.
What they - and others - are trying to do is "strike while the iron is hot". Not only that, though, they are also trying to actively create television (and other mediums) that will appeal to this, now pseudo, geek culture.
As much as these shows are seemingly trying to cash in on the "Twilight" craze (wasn't that over a couple years ago?) I think it's more akin to the aforementioned "Buffy"series in that they are creating, what they believe to be, "cult" television shows.
This is an obvious indicator of the coming death of geek culture.
Now, it may seem a tenuous thread connecting these shows (and, the entirety of similarly themed content) but look at it from another perspective.
How we consume entertainment has changed. We "mainline: television shows in a way that used to be nearly impossible to do.
I don't have to have hundreds of blank VHS tapes to be able to watch my favorite shows. They are all available either on DVD or through the internet. I could watch "Buffy", in its entirety, in a week or two. I no longer have to wait for a show to unfold. I can miss an entire series while it's on the air and still "catch up" at my leisure. I've never watched "Breaking Bad" as aired. instead I downloaded all of the episodes and watched them in a matter of days.
the same goes for most shows i watch these days. Sure, there are some I HAVE to watch when they premiere, but generally, I can watch whatever I want, whenever i want.
You may be thinking "you're making two very unrelated points." but, really, they are a part of a larger sum.
We all, for the most part, have embraced this "Geek culture". We've all embraced , to varying degrees, being "fanboys".
Where it used to be that owning an entire series would be sort of weird or a sign of fanboy geekiness, that behavior, now, is the norm.
DVR, DVDs, Torrents, or "illegal" streaming sites, give us access into formerly geek territory.
Yes, the face of media is changing, and we along with it, but as usual, the powerful entertainment companies (and generally every other business trying to sell to the public at large) recognize the market for what it is and attempt to tailor their product to fit the demos.
As we all know (or should know), once these mega corporations have their targets ins sight, they will flood the marketplace with what they think "we" want.
"People are mainlining shows like Buffy, and they love twilight - even if ironically- Weird and geeky is HIP! Let's give it to them! more robots, more sci-fi techno-babble, more comic books, more supernatural! they LOVED batman and the Avengers, and zombies. give them MORE of that!"
And while the geek inside me is jumping up and down in excitement, I realize also that we are in dangerous territory.
There is Always a backlash. We start being force-fed what we like. It's like saying "I love Doritos" and, where you used to get a bag here and there, you are now being inundated by truckloads of the stuff and having them shoved down your throat by the shovel full."
"Geek culture" stops being weird, different, special, and eccentric when EVERYONE is doing it. It becomes just another fad.
We become uneasy with it. Start recognizing that the line between real and marketed as real becomes blurred.
When I used to watch Zombie movies, or read Star Trek novels, I was looked at like I had three heads. Now it's so commonplace and ordinary. My 62 year old Mother loves 'The Walking Dead', 'Game of Thrones', and 'True Blood'. I think that speaks for itself.
now, I'm not saying that being a geek is cool because it is "different' or that it wouldn't be cool if it's "popular". Instead i am trying to say that whenever ANYTHING becomes a part of the "machine" and hits its cultural saturation point, the backlash against it is guaranteed.
As i said before - Mark my words...

(note: This isn't a fully fleshed-out piece of writing. I am going off the top of my head, but it is something I've been thinking about... and noticing. The backlash has already begun. Whether it will be quick or take a long time is a matter of conjecture. however, I believe the point stands.)

Happy Little Trees; John Cusack Hates my Beard.

Hey folks!

Surprise, surprise, surprise... Sometimes Life ain't so bad after all.

Yesterday evening i delivered my first paid piece of art in a long time.
I was commissioned to do a portrait for a former co-worker last month, and somehow I actually followed through and finished it ON TIME.
Being a friend and not having sold anything for awhile, I quoted him a price of $40.00 - I think it's a steal.

The painting was for his wife as a Valentine's Day gift. I finished it with approximately 18 hours to spare, sent him a message that it was done and could be picked up at his leisure, and promptly patted myself on the back for a job well done.

Now, I've never been a very big fan of my own work, and I am never happy with the "finished" product - actually, i can never decide what "finished" actually means in terms of art, but I have to be objective and look at the piece as if I were the audience and not the artist. What I may not find "good enough" may actually surpass the expectations of the audience.
This time I was rather pleased with my work, though one can never tell how it will be received.

So, anyway, he called me around 1030 last night asking for directions to my house. I gave him the address and he said he'd be up shortly. around 11 my phone rang again; he was here.
I went outside to give him the painting, hoping he would like it. Truth be told, I was nervous. What would i do if he were to say "Man, that sucks. I don't want it." or something akin to it?
Thankfully he loved it. He seemed genuinely excited and actually gave me a hug! I was relieved and incredibly happy with that response. i could not have hoped for more.
He thanked me several times and, when it came time to pay me he actually "tipped" me another $10.

It feels good selling your work. It's one thing to be told it's good, or that someone likes it, but selling it takes things to another level entirely. It's validation, in a way. It says "You aren't just wasting your time." or "You aren't just fooling yourself, you do have talent.".
This has been the best moment of my "artistic" life in a long time.

But it wasn't over.

The client was so pleased with the work that he, on the spot, commissioned another portrait.

He explained to me how his wife's mother had passed away and he wants to commission a portrait of her for Mother's Day. I accepted without hesitation.

Now, this isn't paying the bills, mind you, but it helps. I've been out of work since August and i am in desperate need of money. If I can make a name for myself and get my work out there, hopefully it will attract more business and more opportunities.

While I don't love doing portrait work, I do love painting.
It would be awesome if I could sell my other work - the more "abstract" stuff, for lack of a better word - but I'll take what i can get for now. Rome wasn't built in a day. (Hell, a McDonald's isn't either.)

In a related story...

Yesterday was a doubly-good day for my artistic career.

On top of selling a painting, I also found out that one of my favorite pro wrestlers decided to use one of my designs as his new T-Shirt:

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the GREAT Sugar Dunkerton ( @sugardunkerton ) has chosen my logo design as his new T-Shirt - granted, he made some minor changes: Brown background, name on headband, and "Big Hair. Don't Care" - but the design itself is mine.

Sadly, i am not making any money from this. I had tweeted this picture to Dunkerton as a fan and told him he could have it free of charge.

While that may have been utterly retarded of me, I don't care (my girlfriend, on the other hand, wants to smack me.). 

I'm a big fan of Pro Wrestling and have a great deal of respect for independent wrestlers. They work hard and sacrifice a lot to do what they do. Guys like Dunkerton bust their asses to get where they are and literally give their blood, sweat, and tears for the fans. I felt the least i could do is give something back. All i ask for is credit as the designer.  (And I'm getting a free shirt out of it)

Now, to clarify a point: I will not be doing that again.

The free design was a one time deal. It will, hopefully, lead to more opportunities. 

Much like my decision to charge a mere $40 for an 18x24 portrait, this is a strategic risk on my part that will hopefully pay off in the future. - and don't get me wrong. I didn't design it with that intention. I did it as a thank you to Sugar Dunkerton as a fan. that he then chose to use it for a T-Shirt is a bonus. I did not do it with that intention. I am not trying to piggy-back on his fame. 

There yo go, folks. My career as an artist is picking up steam. Hopefully things will continue to roll along in a positive - and lucrative - direction.

Sugar Dunkerton links: http://itssugardunkerton.tumblr.com/

In other news....

John Cusack is a crazy person, hates my beard, and wants to beat my ass.

From my twitter feed @MrStephenPike 

I sent what i thought was a pretty funny joke at John's expense after he went on a bit of a rant on twitter (The same kind of rant you here from schizophrenic homeless people or similar shut-ins of the Ted Kaczinsky/Howard Hughes variety.

I legitimately think john Cusack may be insane. If you don't follow him on twitter, i suggest you do - or at least take a peek at his feed - it's filled with the weirdest, off-the-wall, and f rankly insane stuff. 

I'm not sure if John thinks he is making good points or what. He seems, and this is my opinion, to be wrapped up in his own head and probably considers himself to be an "outspoken Hollywood celebrity"akin to, a George Clooney or Susan Sarandon.
 However, he comes off more like an escaped mental patient.

Now, I'm not a a liberal by any means - nor am i conservative, really. I exist somewhere in the middle, as I imagine most every day people do - but I have no problem with people exercising their right to free speech and opinion. 
Though, there is this odd thing that happens with "celebrities". 
They live in a different world than the rest of us. They get to live in a world much more forgiving than the rest of us. Not only that, they live in a world of "yes men".
They are adored, people fawn over them, doors that would be closed to you or I are opened wide for them. It can be summed up like this: Their jokes always get a laugh.
People are so eager to please them - hell, nearly deify them - and want their attention so badly that they will "support" whatever bullshit the celebrity does or says. 
Where our opinions can go unheeded, or shot down, theirs is bolstered by their admirers (not only fans, but those around them on a daily basis). What ends up happening is that they get a false sense of reality, one in which they are always "right". for every one naysayer, there are dozens and dozens of others telling them, frankly, that their shit doesn't stink. 

this Cusack feud didn't start with that comment above. It can be traced back to a couple of months ago when I made another comment to John during one of his rants.
He and another twitterer (?)  were arguing back and forth about "Climate change/Global warming" after John had linked a story about it from Forbes. 
(what it boils down to is this: John thinks the story was n inside job. Capitalists calling out the global  warming crowd, etc. typical liberal stuff.)
 by the time i got "involved" John was going a bit nuts in his responses and making himself look quite foolish.
here is a link to a story about it:

http://twitchy.com/2012/11/19/john-cusack-dons-his-crazy-pants-for-insane-global-warming-rant/


i said to him 

 @MrStephenPike: "john. You're an actor. I respect your opinions and zeal. But just chill"


what I meant was this "John. You sound like a crazy person. I respect that you can have an opinion, and are passionate, but you look like an asshole arguing about climate change on twitter."
Given that twitter allows 140 characters per tweet, I shortened it, thinking - incorrectly - that he'd understand my point. Instead I got this:

@JohnCusack "fuck that my feed my thoughts"

and then (I'll respond to each in turn)

@JohnCusack "i'm a person engaging in all sorts of things - doesnt take a genuis to figure out oil coms spend billions debunkng science"

I never said anything about the topic at hand, so I'm at a loss as to why he immediately jumped down my throat.

(apparently, it does take a genius to spell.)

he then continued...

@JohnCusack:

"in fact it takes very little brain poower to figure that one out- preety low hanging fruit-- even an actor could get it!"

Missing my point entirely. i will conced the point that what i said could be taken that way, but he chooses to ignore me retort.

"brace your self- this ones also gonna be incrediable to believe- people profit- make lots and lots and lots of money from war"

Here John thinks he is making some major point to me. However, again, I wasn't arguing with him. Nor is this point valid as the discussion wasn't about war. Nor, really, should it have been about oil. Then there is this idea that war is fought for oil... but i digress, and leave that to another discussion.

"even some musicians and writers have figured tat ot .. but put you faitth in forbes in forbes we trust"

Here is John lumping me in with "the enemy". He must see things in purely black and white terms. ironic, really. a sort of "If you're not with us, you are against us" mentality. He does not know my political beliefs or where I stand on the issues, nor was i defending Forbes or their article.

"i see it as a public service"

EGO. Simply ego. this illustrates my point. john believes he is "fighting the good fight" and giving of himself, using his celebrity to make a difference. In reality, he is just being a knob on twitter and arguing with people about something his in unqualified to argue about. He is entitled to his opinion - as I said in my original tweet - But in his "reality" John is a crusader, a righter of wrongs, leading the charge against tyranny and corruption!!! Having an actor whose popularity peaked two decades ago linking an article on twitter does not qualify as a "Public Service". 
that is the mentality, boiled down, of celebrities. It's not only a benefit of their position, but a RIGHT. Somewhere along the line, they go from opinions to "facts". It isn't only a right but their responsibility to "open our eyes" to the "truth". 
what they fail to realize is that, just because you are famous - for whatever reason - it doesn't make your opinions any more correct than say a carpenter, or a librarian, or a steel worker... just because you get a spotlight to stand in, doesn't mean what you say carries any more weight or that it is right. in fact these celebrities can be so fundamentally wrong that it becomes laughable. Again, though, where you or I might be corrected by others when we are wrong, these celebrities often times aren't. The opposite, in fact, happens. 
I'm not sure at what point a celebrity goes from "being famous for what they do" to "public servant". I understand that, with celebrity comes opportunity and that many celebrities choose to use their fame for good, whether it be charities or actual public service announcements and the like. Where it gets out of hand is illustrated beautifully here by John Cusack. He is so convinced of his own worth as a "public servant" that he fails to understand that not everyone agrees with him and he isn't always right.

"so the box you put me in" actor liberal " -any other thngs i do count - happy to be reduced to cultuaral sterotype that it ?"

Hilarious that, in almost the same breath, he goes from stereotyping me - I know much more about him than he knows about me. In fact, he is basing his entire rant on ONE tweet from me, to where i end up being a capitalist cheerleader who hates science and denounces all of Hollywood as liberal actors - to claiming that I am putting him in a "box" and reducing him to a "cultural stereotype". Seriously, the irony is too delicious. What an arrogant asshole. and it shows how his mind works. He has a safety net to his argument and belittles himself by playing the "You're a bigoted, prejudiced conservative" card. He can't understand that people might actually disagree with him without being a truck driving, redneck, gun toting, conservative Nor does he recognize that I was trying to help him out. The fact that i could find an article online titled "
John Cusack dons his crazy pants for insane global warming rant" proves I was right when I said to him "chill out".

Keep in mind that, during this tirade, I was trying to say to John that he had misunderstood what i said and that It wasn't a shot at him. I even said that I was a fan of his work and just thought he was demeaning himself by acting the way he was. The irony of his tweets to me was lost on him.
I wasn't defending Capitalism, nor saying Climate Change isn't real. But John, in typical fashion, took any criticism of his view point as a personal attack. But that is what happens to people who are told - celebrity or not- that they are right all the time. 

anyway. Now John Cusack wants to kick my ass. 
I don't understand the "U stalk me..." bit. It's twitter, ass-hat. You have followers - I quite liked "The Raven" - and when you tweet something, people read it and can respond! (Imagine that!) And sorry, John, not everyone is going to agree with you. sometimes people make jokes on twitter at your expense (Celebrity can't only be about people kissing your ass after all.).
I don't think responding to a tweet is considered "stalking". (Sorry, John, but i won't be on your front lawn with a boom box any time soon.)

What was crazier, to me, was the response from his followers. This is where i have found that there is little hope for the human race. 
On both occasions, my twitter interactions spiked. However, most of them were creepy "good one, John" messages.
now, if you are familiar with twitter, you know how scary/crazy people are. People will do and say anything to get a little attention from a celebrity, no matter how big or small their fame is. (Let's call it the Chris Brown effect.) People are willing to let anything slide as long as they can think they can get attention from their "celebrity of choice". Even just a cursory glance at the responses to celebrity tweets is fascinating, if not a little disturbing. People absolutely fawn over the celebrities and reinforce that "you are always right" mentality. No matter how asinine a comment, you will see hundreds of retweets and favorites for things like "Good night" or other equally benign statements. People will beg to be retweeted by celebrities, or try to be overly enthusiastic about things in order to be noticed. It's a sort of pseudo-fame, at least in their minds. Like, if that celebrity acknowledges you then it means you are somehow important or impressive. And while it is cool to interact with celebrities, at the same time I understand that they are just people. They aren't above us, nor should they be glorified. Not everything they do is right, nor is it good. Not all their opinions  or points are correct or make sense... sometimes celebrities just act like crazy people (just like the rest of us.). It sickens me, really, to see those levels of unabashed adoration and fawning. Twitter should be renamed "Kiss celebrity ass for reflected fame" dot com.
Now leaving Rant Town....
ANYway

Moral of the story? John Cusack is a fucking insane person.

Side note: john has officially blocked me on twitter. He is in esteemed company, joining the likes of Hulk Hogan and Wil Wheaton. (I really don't know what i did to offend Wesley Crusher though. Well, he certainly has gotten quite a bit of mileage out of a couple seasons of Star Trek: TNG... about 25 years worth. Ride that Nerd wave, Wil. Ride it all the way in.)

(It must suck being an actor who peaked in his youth...two decades ago.)

and by the way... my beard is fucking awesome, and not at all like Gandalf's.
In fact, it is much more like a certain Commander Riker...
I was good before it, but since I grew this beard I've really gotten GREAT.

ART FOR ART'S SAKE

Welcome, again, to the least active Blog in the known universe.
My apologies if you've been waiting around for me to update but what can I say?
Just because you have nothing better to do with your time doesn't mean I don't!
(actually yes... yes it does.)

Anyway. I think I'd like to tell you about what I've been up to as of late.
(Warning to readers: I live a boring and uneventful life.)
Here is my opportunity to discuss art. Well, really, MY art.
Without further ado...

ART-

I've been much more active as of late in regards to my art.
Being an artist, and therefore subject to the whims of my own creativity, my output tends to be sporadic.
At times the creativity flows like a deluge, while at other times it's as dry as a desert.
I couldn't tell you why that is.
sometimes I can't do anything but think of my art and what I'd like to do. the ideas come at me relentlessly and it's as if I can't get them on the page fast enough.
Other times I'll sit and stare at the blank paper or canvas and see nothing.

I'm not sure I'm qualified, nor do i think I could articulate what it is to be "creative".
Often times people will ask me where i get my ideas from.
My answer, invariably, is, "I don't know. they just come to me."
And that is the truth. Most often, when I look at a blank piece of paper, I can almost see what it is I am going to draw. It's quite like looking at a picture and then copying it down. Almost as if I am tracing it.
Other times I'll just be drawing or painting and the ideas just flow out of me naturally, without thinking.

I put pencil to paper and see where the image takes me.
If I'm drawing a face I just pick a point to start from and just roll with it, letting the lines dictate to me where they will go.

What has the result of my newly invigorated artistry been?
Cartoons.

I purchased a new sketchbook and decided to fill it (at first anyway) with "Monster faces".
The idea was to create a variety of "aliens" and "monsters" based, partially, on my having watched all 14 combined seasons of Star trek: The Next Generation and Deep Space 9.
I've always enjoyed the alien designs on Star Trek (Michael Westmore's designs, for the most part.) and took inspiration from them.


the first half of the book was done using pencil and colored pencils.
I don't often color my own work but I also realize that my work suffers for it.
The coloring allows me to truly "finish" the designs and bring them to life.
I was quite pleased with what I had done but began to have a bit of "Creature fatigue" and decided to branch out.
I added to the mix the use of a fine-lined sharpie and began using the pencil drawings as more of a guide than a finished product.
The results were terrific and I had quite a bit of fun doing these  new pictures.
Not only did I broaden my medium but also went in a new direction in terms of subject.

I've always enjoyed creating characters and giving them some back story (even if that story exists solely in my own mind.)
I had a fun time coming up with these characters and found myself chuckling as I drew.

When it comes to my more humorous characters (or even other ideas) I like to use the "Andy test" to see if they truly make the grade.
So, what is the "Andy test"? It's simple, really.
My best friend, Andy, has always made a great audience for my work and is, often, creative impetus for it.
When I create something that I hope to be humorous, I keep in mind my friend and his tastes (our tastes, really.) as to what is or isn't funny.
Basically it comes down to this:
"Would this make Andy laugh?"

My most successful pieces do.
From Albino Pimps to tiny booted Santa Claus and everything in between.
If it makes him laugh then it's a keeper.

These aren't really "Finished pieces" in that they come from my sketch book and are not made using very good quality supplies. (A set of 12 store brand colored pencils and a random #2 pencil I found.)

Here are two such drawings.
The first is titled, simply, "Cool Guy"

I based this on an amalgam of a few people I have known.
All of the were friends of my Father and, invariably, Vietnam veterans.
One guy never took his sunglasses off, no matter where he was.

The second drawing is titled "MC Bagga Cheetos" and he is an homage to "Old School Hip Hop" fashion ala The Fat Boys(z?). That was also my first real crack at Graffiti lettering. I hate Graffiti lettering.

I've done other art work fairly recently, including this drawing of actor Norman Reedus. He plays Daryl Dixon on 'The Walking Dead' and I am a big fan.

As much as i love to draw, my true artistic passion lies with painting.

I, traditionally, use acrylic paint (I know, I'm so not cool, right? REAL artists use Oil.)

I have very few existing examples of my work these days, mostly due to my either throwing things away or giving them to people. 

I've sold very few pieces in my life. That can be chalked up to my own distaste for my work (Don't all artists hate their own work?) and my inability to see art as a commodity.

Art is, by it's very nature, subjective. Therefore, I've always found it difficult, if not impossible, to put a price on art. Not merely my own art, mind you, but the art of others as well.

I'm sorry, but I don't think it has any real intrinsic value outside of it being a work of creativity and passion. 

To put a price tag on that is arbitrary at best.

There should never be a piece of art worth Millions of dollars.

The very idea of that makes me sick.

Then again, the artistic community and the "Art world" as a whole has always pissed me off. 

Art being subjective, in my eyes, means that -- ideally -- it's all good.

Artists, critics, and the art-appreciating public suffer from their own pretentiousness. 

I remember having to take part in "critiques" and listening to the bullshit people would come up with about the art and it's "meaning and symbolism".

Sometimes, assholes, -- and I paraphrase -- a cigar is just a cigar.

(This applies to writers as well and especially English teachers/professors.)

Not all Art is symbolic, allegorical, or even meaningful. Sometimes it just exists as is.

In my artists statements i would always concoct the most bullshit riddled meanings and explanations.

what i learned from that is, if you tell people it's meaningful or you can explain it well-enough they will believe you and "see" it themselves.

To hear someone agree with my artist's statements about a work, and for them to explain the painting to someone else gave me endless joy. It reminds me, in a way, of "The Emperor's new clothes". 

It snowballs. Nobody wants to feel stupid or that they don't get it that they will then pretend (or even fool themselves) to "get it".

Want proof of this? Go look at some of the work at MoMA in N.Y.C. and tell me that it's "good" or deserves it's place.

I thought I'd share with you a few other pieces from my collection of works.

Keep in mind that most of my truly good work is gone. What I have represents but a fraction of the whole. Some, thankfully, are rather good and I'm lucky enough to still own my favorite piece. 

These are all acrylic on canvas, usually in the 18x20 range or smaller.

Please excuse the ones that happen to be sideways. Try as i might, i couldn't get them to upload correctly. Despite having changed their orientation several times in order to remedy that fact. None-the-less, here you go.

This i did for a friend - at their request. It's a "Buck Moon". That, of course, is also it's title.

This is from a dream I had. I called it "Wildfire"

This one is based off of fall leaves.

This is an early entry in my "God's Eye" work. (no, not those stupid things they have you make in arts & crafts)

More from the "God's Eye" collection. 

Another stage in the evolution of the "God's eye".

GREECE! Done for the girl I love.

Done at the behest of my Father. It's my neighbors house.

A self-portrait. I hate self-portraits.

Painting of my Father that i did the day he died. Used at his wake.

As i mentioned before... Here is my favorite piece. In many ways it is my "Masterpiece" but you can decide that after I'm dead. It's the girl I love.

Another weird portrait of the girl I love (see above)

Another done at the behest of my father. I asked him to set a few things up for me to paint. This was his choice. A few old bottles he had dug up and a 1st edition of "Atlas Shrugged".

Done as a gift for the girl I love. 

An offshoot of my early "God's eye" work that went in a decidedly different direction. This relates to my Father's cancer and death. Specifically the moment of his death.

 "Blackpool"

Another portrait of the girl I love.

Abstract life

and, finally, I got obsessed with drawing and painting street lights for a little while. This is the only surviving example.

There you have it; My art.

I'd like to put more work up when time allows. I have more these days. Many of these were done 5 or 6 years ago. I'll update when I can get to it (2014)

Long Time Gone

Howdy Folks,
(By that I mean nobody.)

Long time no see.

I am entirely too scatterbrained (lazy?) to keep a blog updated.
My interests are varied and change often.

I've been working on some designs to sell- t-shirts, various other products-
I figure i have to do something productive with my time.
I'm one of the many who are out of work right now.
That is someones fault, right? Not mine?
(yes it is my fault.)

I've come up with some cool stuff. When I get the store off the floor I will link it here for you to check out.
(all none of you.)

So, that our time is not completely wasted:
(Who are we kidding?)

Those sands, they shifted

Letting yews bow and keys jangle.

Kicking tin, the Doppler fog

Rolls in.

Thirds?

We swallow

 Eight.

 its angle?

 Acute.

We build, and marvel.

Setting pin straight and mason crumble.

Breaking glass, the stillers song

Flits in.

Fifths?

We swallow;

Slake.

Its angel?

A mute.

Until next time-

S.P.

Make up you mind already

A little update.
I've deleted a few more pieces. I'm not sure why.
I'll be returning soon with something new.
for now i have to go sand my living room walls so we can paint them.
FUN.

-S