Aesthetic Taste Volume 2
Aesthetic Taste is a quarterly publication dedicated to the advancement of art and art practice. It is a forum for artists and art-enthusiasts eager for challenging and refreshing art-work and criticism of contemporary art. It is a place which seeks to breed a new movement in art which truly reflects the values, dreams, and desires of contemporary culture. The drive to create something which is never-before-seen is the only driving force in the advancement of art. It is the job of Art Historians to invent meaningful narratives to explain this advancement. No porpoises were harmed in the creation of this publication. Eat Dolphin, save Tuna.
AESTHETIC TASTE AT V2 Contributors Editors Roger Allan Cleaves Josh Nemec Artistic Contributions By Any One Jenny Hanniver- Dear Jenny Advice Column David Gerhard Vlado Ketch Cornelius P Wifflecock-Writings J.J. Gerad- Broom Jobs Fancy Donavan Volume Two Art has always been a form of expression that allows a person to be blunt, poetically simplistic, or intricately complicated through visual means. I find it to be troublesome that in a world with so much turmoil, one in which imagery is so abundant, that more artists are not taking the opportunity to give us their raw and uncensored thoughts concerning this time period. When does the push to be politically correct, and the push of the social insistence to portray a vanilla lifestyle, hurt our own existence? In the arts there are a few ways to convey bottled, unbridled thoughts through imagery. Some artists suppress those thoughts in the nothingness of homeless abstraction in an attempt to hide a loud message in the folds of standard beauty and prettiness. Another way that artists have combated the need to separate their public body of work from their more aggressive works is the creation of alter egos that respond to materials with a different hand and thought process. In the past we had artists like Dr. Syntax, or Rose Selavy, and today we have Banksy. Beyonce Knowles' alter ego is Sasha Fierce and Marshall Mathers' is Slim Shady, both created to say things the artist wouldn't normally say unless in character. Many artists have works they never show anyone because of fear of negative criticism based on what is "appropriate". Often times we miss viewing very powerful creations because of this quandry. Alter egos can also allow an artist to be more honest and genuine, without the negative or positive connotations that their reputation brings. Authors use pen names for this very reason. The difference between an alter ego that is created as a critical defense, and one that is created to circumvent individual limitations (or strengths) might seem conceptually irrelevant, though in reality the distinction is important. The motives are as different as a superhero who dons a disguise to fight crime, and one who merely lets his/her civilian disguise drop. In our second volume of Aesthetic Taste we hoped to capture the power of confidence. In our recent call for art Aesthetic Taste received many submissions from around the world and Volume 2 is a collection of artist thoughts, both real and imaginary, that have very distinct messages to deliver through their imagery. All of the works are thoughtful, with some being made through process and the layering of thoughts, and some made with spontaneity and the grace of seizing the moment. You will find works of art that speak to the current conditions of the art world and some works that attack contemporary life. In all cases the artists in this volume created their work with confidence and without fear. Aesthetic Taste is proud to offer artists a forum that does not cater to standardized beauty, but seeks to find beauty in works that defy the standard by being differently beautiful, honest, and possessing of integrity. Josh Nemec 1. 1. Jasper Baton DEAR JENNY Dear Frat Brat, First off, thanks for reading the first issue, we appreciate the support. Your question, like your bong, is made of several different components, which when combined make me want to give up and overdose on Dear Jenny, Choco Tacos. I can't really fault you I think shows like South Park, The for liking those programs, no quesDaily Show, and Tosh.O are the tion that they are amusing. Howhigest forms of art this generation ever, I have trouble believing that has to offer. They make me think they make you think about "life and about life and shit. They are entershit", more likely is that they make taining and that's what I talk about you laugh and geyser some 4Loko when I'm smoking a bowl with dribbles out of your nose. The enmy friends. I feel like they do evtertainments offered by South Park erything that art used to do. What etc. typically take amorphous obsershould I take away from contemvational tangents to popular culture porary art? I don't even understand and render them uncanny through that shit half the time. I saw the absurdity. This temporarily makes first issue of your zine and I felt a the familiar, frightening and boring connection with the work because seem harmless and goofy. In the it was all weird but that's all I took light of day these observations fail away. How can I relate to the work and falter quickly. Please believe better? that this is not a transcendental experience. The sensation that you feel when you watch these programs, presumably a feeling of a wider range of consciousness that connects with more disparate and unusual conclusive thoughts, is not "art". It's the weed and I believe it's called being "high as fuck". I do agree with you that contemporary art, particularly Aesthetic Taste, differs from this experience because contemporary art presents often uncomfortable, original and challenging thoughts which are diametrically opposed to the comforting, predictable and placating thoughts associated with a marijuana high. In conclusion, allow yourself to be able to enjoy entertainments, such as contemporary art, that do not necessarily make you feel safe or comfortable. You will find a new kind of intellectual enjoyment, as well as a strategy for dealing with the realities of a changing and frightening world, instead of insulating yourself from them. Lastly, you described our zine as "weird", and I think you require some context as to the definition of weird. I therefore submit this dialog from the David Lynch film "Dune": Paul: Stilgar, do we have wormsign? Stilgar: Usul, we have wormsign the likes of which even God has never seen. When compared to "Dune", gerrymandering, homicide, mercury or Creationism you will see that Aesthetic Taste is downright logical. Dear Jenny, What do you think about this push to present technology as the new improved Art 3.0? Does traditional art have anything left or is Aesthetic Taste our only hope? If you guys fail I guess we will be chasing fads. Dear Galling Gallery Gadgets and Gizmos, It does seem like galleries and museums tend to drop trou for any artist that needs an extension cord nowadays, and in their reflected LED spotlights many traditional paintings and drawings appear even more archaic and cadaverous than ever before. Internet based art, computer projections, digitally manipulated images and motion sensors are all becoming staples of the art world clime, along with increased attention on let's-pretend-it-still-counts-as-newmedia film and photo. Keep in mind that art and technology have always had a competitive relationship, except that technology does not seem to realize it's competing and generally doesn't give a shit what art does. I personally think the idea that art is a frontrunner in the technology game is a joke, and that instead of blazing new trails into the future of art microchips are only reenacting the path that film, cameras, and printing presses walked before them. Technology is the hot new ticket because it excites people, and it excites them because they have no idea how the fuck it works. To Joe Museum Goer digital animation is as impressive as a Durer engraving because both seem equally impossible. Does it matter if you bake an apple pie in a convection oven rather than a mud dome fueled by dried cow shit as long as the resulting pie tastes good? The artist's idea, and their ability to effectively communicate that idea, is paramount, and a good artist can articulate a thought in any medium be it oil paint, Adobe Illustrator or shadow puppets. Often the variety of technological "innovations" exhibited seem like nothing more than a land grab with artists territorially marking their specific technological "explorations" in some art world equivalent of commenting "first!!!111:)<3" on a message board. In the best case scenario what are they hoping for anyway? Does art really have a prayer when contending with the public's attention against Hollywood and the internet on their home turf? I know for a fact that most galleries don't have the funds to throw 200 million dollars at a new Transformers movie, and most artists don't have the skills to animate one anyway. Art is meaningful to culture because it's art, independent of it's technological affiliations, and a hundred years from now great paintings will be still be great paintings, but current technology will look like those tappy things that turn Morse code into electricity. In conclusion, don't worry because unlike technology, art can't die. And for those of you that really, genuinely want to see the bastard offspring of technology and art, buy a fucking Ipod. Love, Jenny Hanniver Jenny I need your help! There is this painting hanging over my toilet and when I pee and look at the painting I feel this burning sensation? Does this mean that the painting is good? Dear Paint Drip, This "burning sensation" could be practically anything, kidney stones, urinary tract infection, the clap etc. so I hesitate to diagnose you with any certainty. However, given that you put specific emphasis on the painting I am assuming your genitals don't burn when urinating in other locales. My guess is that you have an acute affliction of Aesthetitus Freudicus, a very rare genital parasite that thrives on the brain waves/endorphins produced by the most exceptional art forms. Aesthetitus Freudicus is most commonly transmitted via sexual intercourse, and roughly 30 cases are reported nationally each year. For treatment, I would recommend avoiding direct ocular contact with any images which may be thought-provoking or visually articulate, television watching should still be okay. Also begin dosing yourself with a half-pint of turpentine at morning and before bed. Make sure to eat some Saltine crackers first because turpentine sits poorly on an empty stomach. All of this points to the painting above of your toilet being of immaculate artistic integrity, and therefore very "good", now make sure to not look at it for at least six months. Love, Jenny Hanniver 70% of the time (when I bust out the percentages you know A Rogues Gallery by Josh Nemec A man whom I hold in the highest artistic esteem once told me that "good people make bad art, and bad people make good art", and I believed him. Partially because I am unreasonably attracted to sweeping binary oversimplifications, and partially because the legends and anecdotes surrounding most of my art historical influences makes these past masters sound like a line up of deviants who would likely feature prominently in episodes of Cops: Parisian Dandies, had our ancestors the wherewithal to produce such a drama. Egomaniacal chauvinists, political incendiaries, hedonists with bottomless carnal appetites, psychopaths, drunks, murderers (I'm looking at you Caravaggio), all now sit immortalized and canonized in their respective tables of contents in various art historical tomes, their predilections written off by recent generations as dangers inherent to the creative mind. It is commonly bandied about that Hitler was an artist in his youth. This statement, which should be automatically invalidated by the evidence of his godawful paintings, is often delivered with a knowing smirk as if somehow the sense of this is obvious. Additionally, many conspiracy theorists point to the painter Walter Sickert as a potential candidate for the identity of Jack the Ripper, and if true, when coupled with the work of the aforementioned Adolf, could make for a compelling case that tedious, chalky, cityscapes are a warning sign of a sociopathic God-complex. If aesthetics rule beauty (allegedly), and beauty is pure (debatably), and purity is morally good (unfortunately), then romantics would have us believe that there is at least a tenuous relationship between "good" art and a "good" soul. If this is the case why are artists commonly stereotyped as imbibers, loose cannons, and promiscuous rakes? Can only a madman like J.M.W. Turner interpret the chaos of the sea? Can great art be made by bright-eyed youths with bluebirds in their hearts, or only in dim garrets with a cheap whore and a slug of absinthe? I decided to perform a minor social experiment (conceptual artists take note, this will be the only part of the article that concerns you). For a year, I would actively be more selfserving, more calculating and essentially more evil to see if it had any noticeable effect on my artwork. Now, I have been callow, brash and dismissive for a very long time and am by no means a man of spotless conscience, but I was also agreeable, polite, and empathetic. Let's say I was "good" about this was a legitimate experiment). So for the past year I actively tried to knock my goodness quotient down to about 40-50%, which may still seem high, but similarly to how most people would consider a half-rotten apple to be a rotten apple, your goodness quotient need only be around 50% for people to realize that you are effectively a scumbag. So I traded in my natural vacant thousand-yard stare for a cocky glare, and my peculiar bouncing canter for the Humphrey Bogart one-two punch of stoop n' sneer. In order to be a worse person I focused primarily on the following: 1.Refusing to apologize, even if you are at fault: This is a big one, perhaps the most important because it is simultaneously disrespectful and aggressive. Remember "unapologetic" is a compliment, and describing someone as "sorry" is an insult. When you apologize you lose. 2. One-upmanship: Whenever something good happens to someone else remind them of something you did better. Or failing that, bring up someone else who did it better. Most artists should find this to come naturally. 3.Be Vindictive: If you act like an asshole, be prepared for many to attempt to fight fire with fire. As a more evil individual you cannot just accept or shrug off the minor slights and jibes of others. Repay them, excessively. It helps to be creative here, and to have a passing familiarity with manipulation. If someone disrespects you definitely invite them to a pizza party and hit them with a sock full of nickels, but why not turn all their friends against them with hearsay and slander too? 4.Power: Everyone knows that power corrupts, but did you know that the corrupt need power? Otherwise, the mob will beat the shit out of you. It's a fine line between an aggressive, vindictive monster and a whining joke with a split lip. When people think of power they usually think first of money and threats of violence, but remember that power is a totally made up thing, partially based on animal pack dynamic instincts, American self-determination ideology and the manipulation of guilt (most notably through religion). Power exists wherever people think it exists, so you get it by acting like you already have it. If people believe you, you win. If they don't, refer back to #3. You're probably thinking "But, Josh! That doesn't really sound evil, you didn't even cut any throats or pirate any DVDs!" That might be true (#1) but let's keep in mind that I did this for a year (#2), which pretty much invalidates your complaint (#3), because I'm the expert here (#4). As you can see the previous sentence/ justification for the project is itself a carefully constructed response that utilizes all the above points to create a paradigm in which I have placed myself above you. If you were to accept this paradigm, you would concede power to me. If you responded strongly in the negative, I would have to regroup and try again. In most social situations the results were overwhelmingly positive, and I was able to control conversations, avoid working or doing favors, and impress at job interviews. In short, my mistakes were overlooked and the few things I did well were inflated, because in general it is easier to begrudge someone their disproportionate sense of self-worth than it is to challenge them. While it may be interesting to note that refusing to apologize and complimenting yourself can get you further than humility and deference in our society, I think most people are already aware of that particular observation. In terms of my art work I saw no discernable change. The work was no more edgy, critical, humorous, or dark than it had always been. Entering the studio with a swagger, drunk on delusions of grandeur seemed to not impress my half-finished paintings in the slightest. I decided to end the experiment when I caught myself ruthlessly critiquing the aesthetics of an 18-wheeler as if it were a half-assed sculpture. Turns out that the side effect of attempting to lash yourself into the aesthetic equivalent of the Manhattan Project is a complete inability to ignore small irritations, or mediocrity of any kind. This was frequently problematic as most experiential effluvia are mediocre, and have little to no ambition to strive further. While my results obviously represented only the experience of a single individual I can assert with some confidence that the indiscernible conceptual benefit accrued by intentionally poisoning your world view (if any), is not worth the popcorn pangs of guilt when you snap at elderly gentlewomen on public transportation. My own experiences notwithstanding, this leaves us with the question of why there are so many cynical geniuses and so few Tom Hanks's of the art world. I assert that it boils down to two things, the first being a good story. Most people have no interest in art whatsoever, but gossip and misbehavior have sold newspapers daily ever since it became unfashionable to host masquerade balls in your garden maze. The second reason, I believe, is satisfaction. The problem with nice people isn't that they lack ability to make art, it's just that they are so satisfied with things as they are, that they lack the impulse to change, fight or recreate what already exists. It seems to me that the most logical reason to try and make something new is because of a dissatisfaction with what already exists. The reason I find uplifting, sweet cottage landscapes with sensitive hummingbirds flitting around a golden sun infuriating, is not because I'm a heartless misanthrope, but because of the artist's suggestion that this is how the world is. Constant dissatisfaction with things the way they are is not cynical, it's optimistic, because it allows for the possibility that under the right circumstances the world could be a better place. To me the most disturbing art is not the chaotic ghoulish war-scapes of Otto Dix, or the abominable blasphemy of Manuel Ocampo, or any of the numerous and tedious utilizations of fluids produced by the human body. The most horrific paintings are the sun-dappled watercolor dogs lounging on grass, or predictable chalky Austrian cityscapes, because these are the works of artists who live in imperfect societies, in a violent world, in a universe that tends toward entropy and see perfection. I don't believe that being a good artist means you have to be a jackass, but as far as art is concerned the only virtue that is relevant is honesty. The volatile lives led by many of our icons in art history should serve not as a justification for misbehavior, or as evidence of a link between creativity and angst, but as a warning of the price that is often required of people who, though they might lie, cheat and steal in their social lives, accept only hard truths in their art. WILE E. COYOTE :GENIUS By Cornelius P. Wifflecock The scene is so familiar that it has retroactively become clich�. The artist approaches the monolithic red clay cleavage of a towering butte or mesa, shivering with anticipation. Where the cliff face meets the desert floor lay several paint cans, imperceptibly pulsing with solar heat. The artist's brush nosedives for the open cans and sweeps up a lather of paint, and continuing this single serpentine movement, the artist leaps several feet into the air and sweeps the rock face with an impossibly wide swath of pigment in a single slicing downstroke. Moments later he is finished, his illusion complete, and a new railroad tunnel bores into the rock, so convincing that one can almost hear the roar of an approaching train. Myth is the artist's greatest weapon, but sometimes the epic narrative can overpower the individual complexities and intent of the art itself. Jackson Pollock and Joseph Beuys can both be said to have fallen victim to their own legends, and the same can be said of their contemporary Wile E. Coyote. Next month marks the opening of the first ever Wile E. Coyote retrospective at the Acme Project Arena in Peoria, which is appropriately (if presumptuously) titled Wile E. Coyote: Genius. The exhibit will display a collection of his paintings and installations beginning with his works from 1949, and including his massive 1966 sculpture "The Solid Tin Coyote", which is often described, contradictorily, as both his most ambitious achievement, and his greatest disappointment. Coyote is most well known for his site specific trompe l'oeil painting installations, a series on which he labored for the extent of his career. Often rendered in flat, vibrant, simplified shapes these paintings nonetheless suggest almost supernaturally convincing highways, tunnels, bridges and detours. One of the first artists, and one of only a very few painters, to experiment with site specific earth art, Coyote created many of these "illusionistic abstractions" off the highways which variegate the deserts of Arizona and New Mexico. To see the paintings together, painstakingly chiseled from their original rock walls, is chillingly uncanny, as the gallery is optically transformed into a nexus from which endless paths sprout in every direction. Also included are photographs documenting Coyote's 1974 collaborative performance with Joseph Beuys, "I Like America, and America Likes Me", where the two artists locked themselves in a gallery for three days, literally instigating a scripted conflict resolution between German and American sensibilities. Wile E. Coyote: Genius presents an unprecedented look at one of America's most overlooked artists, an artist who's work bridges the gap between the abstract suggestion of landscape found in the work of Clyfford Still and Barnett Newman, and the minimal illusionism of Op-Art. Coyote's influence on contemporary art can be seen today in the portal-shaped abstractions of Ian Davenport, as well as the geometric non-space that Julie Mehretu implies. Others in the art world, such as University of Wisconsin-Madison Professor Emeritus Carol Pylant, take their cues from the trompe l'oeil "painting-as-traversable-door" effect first pioneered by Coyote. In one of his rare interviews Coyote was asked what motivated his varied and eclectic body of work. His response was that, "The rewards in this life are so fleeting, so fast, that we can never catch them. What defines our character is our insistence to keep trying, keep experimenting." Painter, pioneer, American, and trickster, Wile E. Coyote was many things in his storied and tragically short life, but this essential exhibit goes a long way toward proving that he was above all: genius. Image 1-"Gee Whiz-z-z-z-z-z-z-z", 1956 Image 2-"Zip N' Snort", 1961 "Wile E. Coyote :Genius" opens on February 14th 2012, at the Acme Project Arena in Peoria, Illinois all images courtesy of Acme Project Arena. David Gerhard Davidgerhardart.com 1. 1.Training 2. pencil to pixel to pencil to pixel 2. Any One 1. 1.Crap 2.Signs 3.T.V. 2. 3. OFF THE RECORD with J.J. Gerad by FANCY DONAVAN FD: First off, I would like to thank you for doing this interview with Aesthetic Taste. We are glad you made us aware of your work. JJG: I would say the pleasure is all mine but actually the pleasure is yours. I don't usually do interviews but what you guys are doing at Aesthetic Taste is pretty unique. It definitely could use a little of my flavor. I like to think of myself as an extra two shots of whiskey in your glass full of whiskey. Combined it will be enough to take us right over the edge. FD: Oh, so you are one of those artists? JJG: And what kind of artist would that be? FD: You know, the kind of artist that thinks the sun, moon, and all the planets revolve around your studio. JJG: I don't know if I have enough magnetic power to make planets spin around but I have been called the booty magnet .I'm great and all, but do you really think I possess enough power to be my own planet? Should I change my name to one word like Saturn? FD: I probably shouldn't ask this but if you could go by one name what would that name be? JJG: A one word name to describe myself, it would have to be something fierce and strong. I like the sound of Planet Assassin, being that I can murk all the competition anytime I get ready. I'm stealthy, focused, and I go about this thing with a workman attitude. FD: (Laughs) Here at Aesthetic Taste we don't mind braggadocios behavior as long as you can back up the attitude with your work, with which we are very fond of by the way. FD: So, J.J. Gerad is an interesting name. It is not as interesting as Assassin. You have jokes so I'll crack one, Did your mother name you after JJ Evans from "Good Times"? JJG: (Laughs) Here we go with this old bullshit. Every time you critics/ interviewers see a black male artist your mind goes straight to "Good Times". So, to answer your question, fuck no, I'm not named after fucking JJ. I don't make Oppression Art or paintings for church choirs to stand in front of and sing Old Negro Spirituals. For Fucks sake it's 2012. If you are a black artist making slave painting then do me a favor and go kill yourself. The only thing cotton about your work should be the canvas or the paper you draw on.(Chuckles to self) It's funny, actual stereotypes making work that is stereotypical. FD: That's an interesting way of looking at it. Do you feel like minorities support your work? JJG: To support someone's work there needs to be a fundamental understanding of what that work is trying to accomplish, or at least an understanding of formal ideas in art. I cringe at the old slave relic images hanging on some of my friends walls. Can't we get past emotional one liners and folk art? Certain clich� images come to mind like a black hand reaching for another black hand-Unity, and then the image of old black people counting coinsHard Times. The shit people put on their walls requires no thought because people do not like to think too hard about anything. I refuse to make home d�cor. The idea that art can have any other significance other than furniture is over some people's heads. The largest markets of consumers in general are ignorant and my art is for people that have the ability to go past surface level appearances. That's why you picked me for the interview right? You included a few pages of my new graphic novel and you like the story. Be sure to check out my other novels "Sloppy Mop" and-FD: I see I touched a nerve. Why do you think Black Artists fall into those modes of thinking? JJG: For fuck's sake. I just told you that I don't want to talk about art in a segregated context. It's not that you touched a nerve; art just doesn't have anything to do with race for me. When I look at art it is good or bad, important or irrelevant. Art can speak to a variety of different subjects, race and politics in- cluded, but that art should speak for itself, and analyzing the creative motives based on the heritage of the creator should be left out of the equation. Why is there a demand for that kind of art? Let's see, most art collectors are wealthy white people. When they buy work from a black artist they want to feel like they are supporting the struggle, the revolution, whatever the fuck that means today. Black artists who make weird shit outside of "black art" are not accepted by minorities or rich white people. Black artists get pushed to make stereotypical work to make a profit. It's always about profit. The only people that really like your work are you and the gallery if they can sell it. Everybody else is supporting you based on if they like you as a person or not. FD: Since you brought up influences, do you have any influences you would like to talk about? You must be a big [Robert]Crumb fan? JJG: The only crumbs I am fan of are the ones left from a Dirty Danish a la Mode. Haha. FD: I won't even ask what that is. JJG: (Laughs) Don't knock it until you try it. I will field your influence question because it's a subject that I like to talk a lot about. My biggest influence is myself. I inspire me. I put in the work it takes to get here. I planted the seeds and harvested the fields. I milked the cow and baked the cake. I'm eating dinner all by myself and if you don't like it you can suck a dick. I'm your favorite artist's favorite artist. Since I have alter egos that are better artists than most of these bum ass pretenders. I only answer to one higher authority, who ironically is also one of my alter egos. That guy is skilled. You should interview him. FD: When we chose you for this interview we could not have imagined that you would have such an ego. JJG: Look, I can't sit around and wait for the world to recognize my greatness. They don't even know what they are looking for. It sucks being at the mercy of morons. You guys at Aesthetic Taste are doing a good job. FD: So what does the JJ stand for? JJG: My parents wanted me to be great and they really wanted me to be named Michael but there were already a shit ton of guys named Michael that had achieved greatness: Jackson, Jordan, Tyson. So they combined the middle names of the greats and here I am. Jeffrey Joseph Gerad. In talent and name I'm the greatest. No one can beat me. My style is impeccable, my defense is impenetrable. Speaking of penetration, all the pretty ladies call me JJ so you can feel free to use that. (winks) FD: Ughmmm, ok. This is getting a little weird? Perhaps we should get back on topic. JJG: You've seen my art babe. Don't fight the feeling. That tingling sensation isn't fear. Let's cut this interview short and go get a bite to eat. I'm feeling very Danish. FD: Let's just move on. The idea of a talking broom that is also a superhero with robotic legs is kind of out there. How did you come up with the idea? JJG: Awww. I was hoping you needed to satisfy your hunger but we can keep talking shop. You know, some ideas just come to you while you are in the shower or when you are talking amongst friends at the bar. This idea came to me at a show I saw; I think the title was the "Magic Moment". There was this old broom in a corner and the thing just spoke to me. It said, "Use me the right way JJ, because you know what to do with me." I wish you would say those magic words to me Fancy. FD: So you just ripped off the idea from someone's show. JJG : No. I didn't rip them off. They had an idea and I just came up with a better one. They might have put the flour, sugar, milk and eggs in the same room but I baked the cake. Some artists know all the ingredients but only great artists can bake the cake. FD: I guess that is fair to say. It seems that you are able to find inspiration in the most fleeting moments and that is true talent in itself. When you are creating the characters personality are you modeling them after specific people you know. JJG: Yes and no. I model my characters after the true nature of people I know and not the people they pretend to be for public sake. I like to make my characters be the extreme version of people I know. People try to hide their true selves all the time but if you look closely you can tell their insecurities, their true thoughts, and how they would react to a situation if no one was looking. Unraveling the mystery of my characters is part of the process for the storyline. Like when I look at you in those pretty eyes I can tell you are starving and you want to cut this interview short. FD: (Chuckles)Well I am kind of hungry. Why don't we go grab some coffee and I'll pick your brain a bit more? JJG: I read your mind. We're Social Kind of.... facebook.com/AestheticTaste twitter.com/AestheticTaste AestheticTaste.com Story & Art: J.J. Gerad Swell Dialogue: J.J. Gerad Finishes: J.J. Gerad Lettering: J.J. Gerad Coloring: J.J. Gerad Thanks to : J.J. Gerad Graphics VLADO KETCH vladoketch.com 1.Untitled 2.Alive 1. 2. Roger Allan Cleaves rogerallancleaves.com 1.Idiot Savant 2.Burn it Down 3. Shhhhhhhhhh! THE DRAWING BOARD done. officially spent more time on this than my qualifiers. basically 2 months im trying to bust things out as fast as i can, while still doing them right. putting finishing touches on everything. We should review an exhibit of children's art as though it were the Witney Biennial. Thanks for your patience, just trying to make the best product i can. This makes me very happy, excited to see the whole thing. On first read I thought the overall thrust was amusing and worthwhile I just bought some Kentucky Bourbon to see if I can reach a new level. I'll be drinking with you guys in the bar. Never mind. I found a google search that gave me a reasonable explanation. How can I be honest and not sound like an asshole.I have not mastered that art. It makes me think of a deranged Pee Wee's playhouse. Hey the website is looking good. I think if we do a push like this over the next couple of weeks it will be chock full of good content to peruse. The world needs more romance and brodowns.