I got this insightful question from Somethingthereis as a comment on my last post. It’s worth considering. Short answer, “No, I don’t think so.” But I want to explore what I think might be going on for my own edification. And to see if any of this makes sense to anyone else out there.
First off, I did, inadvertently, make some work about 9/11. I had a series of pieces started when 9/11 began, and I made a conscious effort to try to not make the work about it. But, well, you just can’t escape something that big. This is one of the pieces that I made:
It was a radically different piece than what I was making at the time. I was several months before I realized the ways it tied into the event. I’ve still got this one in my studio.
So, part of the reason I don’t think it’s about 9/11 is due the the fact that I’ve made that work already (a sort of binge-and-purge theory, which, admittedly, may not be accurate).
I think there are at least three sources for the airplanes now:
1) my impending trip to Indonesia. The first plane I drew came within a week of finding out I’m going to travel to Indonesia. Without my family. Coincidence? I doubt it. I’m nervous about being gone so far away for so long (well, so long for me, anyways). I’m pretty much a homebody.
2) 
The birds in Bruegel’s paintings. Which are symbolic of the soul. I put one in a painting last year.
3) The references to planes in Joel’s latest prints. They are reflected in puddles. He, too, is referencing Bruegel, I’m pretty sure (although we haven’t had a conversation about it). I found it odd that his planes seems kinda cartoon-y and toy-like (considering how photo-realistic everything else is). Then I started actually looking carefully at planes flying overhead. I’ll be darned, they look cartoon-y and toy-like!
What I think is interesting now is the connection between the plane and control. Woman with Air-Traffic Control Tower, Businessman with Remote Control– I think this has something to do with too much theology, or to much “integration of faith and learning.” I’m really bucking the idea that all of that is controllable (big surprise). I feeling pressure to “justify” myself. No, it’s not that. It’s pressure to have a rational or some kind of apologetic related to my work. (Can you tell I’m dealing with my F&L project?)
I think I’m poking fun at the idea that we can control our lives/nature/God.
…and I guess in a sense that is related to 9/11.
huh.
Filed under: Art a day in May, Gallery, The Big Questions
I was talking to Ryken the other day about how our discipline is one that highly values “writing to know”–how the process of writing helps us figure out what we are thinking about the texts we encounter. It seems like thinking about the art that you make allows you to know–sort of about yourself.
That’s true, with the caveat that I think I’m learning more specifically about my relationship to the world (through the material), to the present, and to the past. I know I’m splitting hairs, but it’s not just an ego feeder (but I’m not denying that it does that).
For me, writing and art-making are definitely related in this way.
I think the struggle I’m having is that the college, in general, understands this idea of “writing to know,” but does not understand “creating to know,” (unless, of course, it is accompanied with “writing to explain”.