Chuck Close on Charlie Rose
I fell in love with Chuck Close’s paintings when I first saw one of his early self-portraits at the MIA in Minneapolis. I grew up going to the Art Institute in Chicago, but I had never seen any of Close’s paintings, or a lot of modern and contemporary work, until I went to Minnesota for college. I was stunned by the way he could not only wield paint, but by the scale and imposition of the work. You almost can’t get far enough away from a Close painting, though in reproduction you lose most of its impact.
Anyway, when I found this link to an interview on Charlie Rose with Chuck Close (via Kimowan), I eagerly clicked through and watched the entire thing twice. Two things stood out to me: (1) Close cites Ad Reinhardt for suggesting that an artist can choose what not to paint, and by doing so, further focus his work and his vision; and (2) Close says that if stranded on a desert island, he wouldn’t be pricking his finger and drawing with blood on the back of a leaf– art needs an audience. He says that 50% of a work of art is the making of it. The other half comes from the experience of the audience. Of course it makes sense, and it’s a rather obvious statement, but it struck me as one of the reasons I work so well under a deadline: once someone is expecting to see something, I get crackin’.
Anyway, I couldn’t help but draw the man whose face I’ve seen at 9 feet high a number of times. I missed a retrospective that Cailin got to see when she was in San Francisco for a conference a few years ago, but the next time I hear of one coming within a couple hours of me or a friend or family member, I’m heading over.
P.S.
Kimowan is an art professor at UNC Chapel Hill where I have just completed my MFA. This summer he is dealing with some paralysis problems resulting form a recurring medical condition. Thus the Chuck Close references, and perhaps some inspiration as well. Kimo, I hope the Met buys your first work after your recovery as well.
