A Genealogy of Bad Painting: Legacies, Soft Objects and Networks

Research output: ThesisMaster's ThesisResearch

Abstract

The thesis re-examines and re-configures the category of Bad Painting. By selecting a disparate group of Bad Painters, explored in the form of small case studies, the research creates an imaginary, timeless peer group that crosses over the genre. This imagined group includes Martin Kippenberger, Philip Guston, Rene Magritte, – especially of the Période vache – Lee Lozano, Sandy Guy, and Andreas Schulze. The thesis proposes a new model for understanding Bad Painting in relation to both networked painting (as advocated by David Joselit in his “Painting Beside Itself”) and new materialisms. The resonances of the latter are reflected back through Bad Painting in terms of what the thesis describes as “Soft Object Painting”. By supplying an idiosyncratic contextual framework, these case studies enabled the production of a body of Bad Paintings made over several years at Goldsmiths. These works borrowed strategies, tactics, attitudes and styles from multiple approaches. Many things entered the practice as a result, including: the outsourcing of painting labour in Chinese workshops as a form of networked production influenced by the networked production of Lee Lozano and the theories of David Joselit; overpainting commissioned paintings; colliding styles and themes in unexpected combinations, such as the juxtaposition of illustrational techniques with the conservative brushwork of painterly abstraction, in the manner of Ivon Hitchens or Howard Hodgkin; use of found images that refer to other areas and histories of cultural production. Through both the practice and the written element, the research proposes to update the genre of Bad Painting. This is largely done by associating the two ideas of “painting as network” and “soft object painting” with the notion of “flattened ontologies”. The research attempts to forge a fresh pathway for Bad Painting, allowing for the continuation of a slippery, de-centred, timeless and rhizomatically structured genre.
Original languageEnglish
Awarding Institution
  • Goldsmiths, University of London
Supervisors/Advisors
  • Chilver, John, Supervisor
Award date1 Jun 2017
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2017

Fingerprint

Genealogy
Bad Painting
Lee Lozano
Tactics
History
Labor
Rene Magritte
Howard Hodgkin
Philip Guston
Ontology
Juxtaposition
Pathway
Peer Group
Outsourcing
Forge
Overpainting
Ivon Hitchens
Painterly
Continuation
Martin Kippenberger

Keywords

  • Bad Painting
  • Soft-Object-Painting
  • Painting and the Digital
  • Painting
  • contemporary art
  • Flattened Ontologies
  • Object-Orientated-Ontologies
  • Network Painting
  • Animism
  • Philip Guston
  • Lee Lozano
  • Andreas Schulze
  • Martin Kippenberger
  • Rene Magritte
  • Période vache
  • Sandy Guy
  • David Joselit
  • Critical Painting

Cite this

@phdthesis{8bef1bed4ef2421db4f69ceb5fa4881c,
title = "A Genealogy of Bad Painting: Legacies, Soft Objects and Networks",
abstract = "The thesis re-examines and re-configures the category of Bad Painting. By selecting a disparate group of Bad Painters, explored in the form of small case studies, the research creates an imaginary, timeless peer group that crosses over the genre. This imagined group includes Martin Kippenberger, Philip Guston, Rene Magritte, – especially of the P{\'e}riode vache – Lee Lozano, Sandy Guy, and Andreas Schulze. The thesis proposes a new model for understanding Bad Painting in relation to both networked painting (as advocated by David Joselit in his “Painting Beside Itself”) and new materialisms. The resonances of the latter are reflected back through Bad Painting in terms of what the thesis describes as “Soft Object Painting”. By supplying an idiosyncratic contextual framework, these case studies enabled the production of a body of Bad Paintings made over several years at Goldsmiths. These works borrowed strategies, tactics, attitudes and styles from multiple approaches. Many things entered the practice as a result, including: the outsourcing of painting labour in Chinese workshops as a form of networked production influenced by the networked production of Lee Lozano and the theories of David Joselit; overpainting commissioned paintings; colliding styles and themes in unexpected combinations, such as the juxtaposition of illustrational techniques with the conservative brushwork of painterly abstraction, in the manner of Ivon Hitchens or Howard Hodgkin; use of found images that refer to other areas and histories of cultural production. Through both the practice and the written element, the research proposes to update the genre of Bad Painting. This is largely done by associating the two ideas of “painting as network” and “soft object painting” with the notion of “flattened ontologies”. The research attempts to forge a fresh pathway for Bad Painting, allowing for the continuation of a slippery, de-centred, timeless and rhizomatically structured genre.",
keywords = "Bad Painting, Soft-Object-Painting, Painting and the Digital, Painting, contemporary art, Flattened Ontologies, Object-Orientated-Ontologies, Network Painting, Animism, Philip Guston, Lee Lozano, Andreas Schulze, Martin Kippenberger, Rene Magritte, P{\'e}riode vache, Sandy Guy, David Joselit, Critical Painting",
author = "Alexander Pollard",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
language = "English",
school = "Goldsmiths, University of London",

}

A Genealogy of Bad Painting : Legacies, Soft Objects and Networks. / Pollard, Alexander.

2017.

Research output: ThesisMaster's ThesisResearch

TY - THES

T1 - A Genealogy of Bad Painting

T2 - Legacies, Soft Objects and Networks

AU - Pollard, Alexander

PY - 2017/6

Y1 - 2017/6

N2 - The thesis re-examines and re-configures the category of Bad Painting. By selecting a disparate group of Bad Painters, explored in the form of small case studies, the research creates an imaginary, timeless peer group that crosses over the genre. This imagined group includes Martin Kippenberger, Philip Guston, Rene Magritte, – especially of the Période vache – Lee Lozano, Sandy Guy, and Andreas Schulze. The thesis proposes a new model for understanding Bad Painting in relation to both networked painting (as advocated by David Joselit in his “Painting Beside Itself”) and new materialisms. The resonances of the latter are reflected back through Bad Painting in terms of what the thesis describes as “Soft Object Painting”. By supplying an idiosyncratic contextual framework, these case studies enabled the production of a body of Bad Paintings made over several years at Goldsmiths. These works borrowed strategies, tactics, attitudes and styles from multiple approaches. Many things entered the practice as a result, including: the outsourcing of painting labour in Chinese workshops as a form of networked production influenced by the networked production of Lee Lozano and the theories of David Joselit; overpainting commissioned paintings; colliding styles and themes in unexpected combinations, such as the juxtaposition of illustrational techniques with the conservative brushwork of painterly abstraction, in the manner of Ivon Hitchens or Howard Hodgkin; use of found images that refer to other areas and histories of cultural production. Through both the practice and the written element, the research proposes to update the genre of Bad Painting. This is largely done by associating the two ideas of “painting as network” and “soft object painting” with the notion of “flattened ontologies”. The research attempts to forge a fresh pathway for Bad Painting, allowing for the continuation of a slippery, de-centred, timeless and rhizomatically structured genre.

AB - The thesis re-examines and re-configures the category of Bad Painting. By selecting a disparate group of Bad Painters, explored in the form of small case studies, the research creates an imaginary, timeless peer group that crosses over the genre. This imagined group includes Martin Kippenberger, Philip Guston, Rene Magritte, – especially of the Période vache – Lee Lozano, Sandy Guy, and Andreas Schulze. The thesis proposes a new model for understanding Bad Painting in relation to both networked painting (as advocated by David Joselit in his “Painting Beside Itself”) and new materialisms. The resonances of the latter are reflected back through Bad Painting in terms of what the thesis describes as “Soft Object Painting”. By supplying an idiosyncratic contextual framework, these case studies enabled the production of a body of Bad Paintings made over several years at Goldsmiths. These works borrowed strategies, tactics, attitudes and styles from multiple approaches. Many things entered the practice as a result, including: the outsourcing of painting labour in Chinese workshops as a form of networked production influenced by the networked production of Lee Lozano and the theories of David Joselit; overpainting commissioned paintings; colliding styles and themes in unexpected combinations, such as the juxtaposition of illustrational techniques with the conservative brushwork of painterly abstraction, in the manner of Ivon Hitchens or Howard Hodgkin; use of found images that refer to other areas and histories of cultural production. Through both the practice and the written element, the research proposes to update the genre of Bad Painting. This is largely done by associating the two ideas of “painting as network” and “soft object painting” with the notion of “flattened ontologies”. The research attempts to forge a fresh pathway for Bad Painting, allowing for the continuation of a slippery, de-centred, timeless and rhizomatically structured genre.

KW - Bad Painting

KW - Soft-Object-Painting

KW - Painting and the Digital

KW - Painting

KW - contemporary art

KW - Flattened Ontologies

KW - Object-Orientated-Ontologies

KW - Network Painting

KW - Animism

KW - Philip Guston

KW - Lee Lozano

KW - Andreas Schulze

KW - Martin Kippenberger

KW - Rene Magritte

KW - Période vache

KW - Sandy Guy

KW - David Joselit

KW - Critical Painting

UR - http://research.gold.ac.uk/22392/1/ART_thesis_PollardA_2017.pdf

M3 - Master's Thesis

ER -