26 September 2006 21:29 / idea8scale

The most fascinating thing maybe about Matthew Barney is this tremendous feedback from people who've actually known him that he could be doing something 'even better' if he had any 'real competition'. My god. Like what?

Somebody needs to engage him. He was originally in wrestling, a competitive sport. Please, bring on the Art Fight.

wanted for immediate viewing: Matthew Barney's med school personal statement.

file under; matthew barney
link is http://pleasureiseasy.info/2006/09/idea8scale.html
14 have made it up below

27 September 2006 03:26

ollie writes,

Plus he's hot.

27 September 2006 08:38

math writes,

yeah, in the latest Drawing Restraint- 14 i think?- he scales the inside of SFMOMA in a bizarre military uniform that really shows off his ass. maybe his challenger should be ugly? or pretty in a fey/wispy way? or female?

i saw a documentary about the making of the Cremaster movies and he struck me as very much like a 'gentle giant' or something- slow, soft speech with incredibly long pauses. although not... intentionally vapid-seeming?... his manner of speech struck me as very similar to Andy Warhol's. i thought: oh, huh. is this, like, the personality of the art darling? do you fundamentally need to act like this to mobilize galleries and museums on such a tremendous scale? very intriguing.

i think a lot of people are dissatisfied with Matthew Barney because his art [to me anyway] seems to come from such an incredibly... non-maladjusted place. he doesn't seem like a tortured artist; he consistently seems like he's having mad fun. i think maybe his greatest-or-most-accessible work could be a work of mourning, if he ever makes one. maybe some gallerists should send in some operatives to break up his relationship with Bjork or something. kidding.

love, math+

27 September 2006 11:49

math writes,

for instance, shit like this ['Matthew Barney and Björk Place an Ikea Phone Order' in McSweeney's] is just. so. stupid.

his work is all about sparring. let's have some modern art fisticuffs. nobody ever did it to Warhol.

27 September 2006 14:56

ollie writes,

Sounds like him and Bjork are walking closely over the twee line. He's quite young, isn't he? Perhaps he will get more interesting, in terms of mourning or dealing with darker aspects, in his later years.

I confess that I've never seen anything by him. I'm curious though -- hoping, actually needing, to visit a proper videostore and spend the weekend watching FASSBINDER and BARNEY. I'll call it my Math weekend. xo

27 September 2006 16:51

math writes,

Matthew Barney's 39 at present. he did burst onto the art scene when he was super young. Drawing Restraint 1 is from 1987; he was 20 then.

you actually can't see much of Barney's work on video, except for bootleg copies. there's a 30-minute segment from Cremaster 3 out on official dvd, called 'The Order'. i presume Drawing Restraint 9 will get a dvd release at some point, since it was released through IFC Film and everything.

i go back and forth on my opinion of Matthew Barney's... method of distribution, or whatever you'd call it. reportedly, the major reason he doesn't release his films on video/dvd is to 'force' people into art houses and museums/galleries to see them. it's cool and not cool. i like the fact that he supports those spaces [and they've served him super-well, been very good to him etc, so his approach certainly makes sense]. at the same time, it's not an especially pop/ulist take on the art world. so yeah, i'm not sure.

viewing the bootleg Cremaster dvds is hmmm. you definitely get a sense of the pure weirdness of his work, but since they're dubs off a telecine or something, the bootlegs look much, much more 'video' than the prints do. well, i mean, basically they look like bootlegs. for me the visual beauty of his films is just overwhelming when you see them in-theatre, but that aspect doesn't really come across on the bootlegs, which are more about just absorbing the plot, characters, and particular symbolic logic. the short excerpt from Cremaster 3 that you can get on regular dvd, that's a good indication of what his films look like in a theatre.

i should think the bootleg dvds would be fairly easy to find in London, but if you have trouble Ollie, i could mail you dvd-r's, no prob.

in contrast to Barney, Fassbinder-on-dvd is absolutely endless. there's, god, maybe 20-25 films out on dvd so far? and more coming. obviously, Fassbinder was never a gallery/museum artist, just a filmmaker and stage dude. in a lot of ways they could hardly be more different, actually. queer/straight, fast/slow, rapid-German-talking/almost-no-dialogue, etc.

if you ever get the chance to check out a Matthew Barney exhibit at a museum [whether it includes film screenings or not], i totally recommend it. it's always a party. just insane Rockstar Shit for everyone to gape at. all Barney's work is essentially about [1] the evolution of form, [2] the artist as an athlete and vice-versa, and [3] competitions and trials [sort-of a subset of 2]. like his hero Harry Houdini, he basically works in the medium of feats. he's constantly climbing museums, which i find brilliant: the idea is the scale; the idea is to scale. he's my favorite living American museum-artist and a big current obsession of mine, so you can expect gobs of posts about him here.

speaking of him being hot, i found this picture from his J Crew modeling days. he sure went on to pursue a very different kind of aesthetic and image of masculinity.

xox, math+

27 September 2006 19:18

ziggy writes,

What do you think of the common criticism that his films are extremely sensationalistic?

27 September 2006 19:30

math writes,

ziggy, hey. well, i don't have any problem with sensationalism as such, but his films are actually fucking slow. it's not really how i would describe them. the scene at the racetrack in Cremaster 3, where he gets beaten, goes on a little bit long for my taste, but the overall context is so bizarre that it never approaches feeling as empty as something like, say, Kill Bill. but i like exploitation films and sensationalist cinema anyway, like Paul Morrissey etc- it's not really where i'd group Matthew Barney but i don't dislike that genre/tendency to begin with.

luv, math+

27 September 2006 20:27

ziggy writes,

how would you call his work? it does not seem very radical to me.

27 September 2006 20:42

math writes,

'radical' isn't particularly the word that comes to mind for me either, although i think he's effectively created his own context and he seems to kind of crave a challenger on his own grounds. with respect to his narrative-esque films like Cremaster 3 and Drawing Restraint 9, there's definitely pretty conventional notions of spectacle operating, but it's the elements of the spectacle that are so unusual. the highly-wrought objects/props and the way he uses makeup are the most obvious aspects, i guess. i mean, lots of films use effects makeup so it's not like that's new, but the way it's used in Cremaster 4 where Barney plays that weird goat man with a third ear on the top of his head, that's totally unique.

how i would call his work? masculine, heterosexual, heroic [existing in a heroic tradition, i mean], referential, original, and really weird. if you mean just his films, they're totally art films and they don't strike me as really pushing the boundaries of that genre or anything. there's a tendency toward striking classical poses, for sure. the actual Drawing Restraint projects where he put himself into restraints to draw [as opposed to the narrative films in the series] are much more conceptually innovative, i think, but again he's fundamentally drawing from Houdini, so it's only 'radical' to the extent that any reworking or reimagining can be 'radical'.

xo, math+

27 September 2006 20:49

math writes,

oh, and large. that's the first descriptor that comes to mind about his work. just very big.

27 September 2006 21:00

ziggy writes,

I don't mean to turn this into an interview, but your thoughts are pretty interesting. I've only seen the Cremaster movies and DR9. I don't know any of his work outside films.

You mentioned in another entry that his fascination with Houdini seems sexual to you, but you find his art heterosexual?

27 September 2006 21:11

math writes,

oh, yeah. i mean, if you look at most of his Drawing Restraint projects, they're loaded with SM-type stuff. tying himself up and trying to draw and whatnot. it's kind of like he's chaining himself to the myth of Houdini. the notes on Houdini in Hypertrophy are also totally fetishistic, so yeah, it's a fascination that seems sexual, or at least he renders it thusly. by the time you're drawing body parts you're being overtly sexual, clearly. but it's not connected up with anything like gay desire or whatever. i don't know much about him personally except for the usual biography you see online and stuff, but to me his art is very straight. i mean, so you've seen Cremaster 5 and Drawing Restraint 9? those are fantastic heterosexual anthems. a comparison to say, David Lynch isn't totally inappropriate.

xo, math+

27 September 2006 22:54

ziggy writes,

Lynch? Well, I don't know that I see much similarity, but that is certainly a more flattering comparison than Kill Bill. ;-)

Barney's films are shot on DV, correct? It will be interesting to see David Lynch do a DV film with Inland Empire.

27 September 2006 23:08

math writes,

the Cremaster films were all shot on DV [Cremaster 3 at 24fps HD] and transferred to 35mm for projection. i'm not sure about Drawing Restraint 7 or 9. yeah, i'm totally looking forward to Inland Empire too.

leave your fingerprints

tags allowed:
strong - em - b - i - u - blockquote
p - br - ul - li - a href - img src


(will stay private)

(optional; public)