How to please the critics –
There is as much to learn from studying those who model the values we object to as by examining those we admire. That is how Andy Warhol got into my eco art textbook, TO LIFE! Eco Art In Pursuit of a Sustainable Planet. His work serves as an instructive ally by embodying environmental UNconsciousness.
Warhol manifests the inverse of the ethics, themes, and aesthetics that characterize eco art. I propose that Wade Guyton, whose current exhibition at the Whitney Museum has been receiving accolades from very-hard-to-please critics, might serve as a lesson in environmental unconsciousness too.
Both artists tamper with fine art protocols by harnessing the human hand that held a paiint brush. Warhol restrained manual expressiveness by relying on silkscreen printing techniques. Guyton relies upon the Epson priinter, Microsoft Word, desktop computers, Adobe Photoshop, bitmapped file, UltraChrome andDurabrite inkjet. The title of his exhibtion reflects the importance of his creative means. It is "Wade Guyton: OS". The OS stands for Operating System.
Although the machine is enlisted as an ally for both artrists, neither embrace the pristine surfaces that chracerize machine-products. Guyton’s printer rivals the subtlety and expressiveness of the human hand by varying the thickness of the pigment and capturing its subtle irregularities.That is why Jerry Salz uses the term ‘quantum touch’ to describe Guyton’s methods.
In contrast, the irregularities that distinguish Warhol’s work derive from his intentionally mindless manipulations of his medium. Indeed, it is by shutting down human sensitivitieis that Warhol manifested the machine’s culture-wide take-over of endeavors that were formerly conducted manually and kinesthetically.
Neither artist is intimidated by the history of art. However, of the two, Warhol seems to remain the more iconoclasic because he paired unconventional fine art painting techniques with unconventional subject matter. As a result, his work probably seems more resolutely contentious to the conservative art observor.
Guyten takes a more orthodox approach by deriving his abstract vocabulary from esteemed master painters from the last century. His elegant work is less likely to provoke controversy and debate.
Nonetheless, these opposing routes lead to the same conclusion – that the anthropocentric values that inspired the last century’s influential art critics are still pleasing critics.