Relevance

Wish You Were Here - trial shot for "A Book About Death" postcard project

(see "Text Messages from the Dead" on right)

The other night I'm at home trying to work through my

yoga routine. Difficult enough, but at the same time I'm

talking out loud, more to myself than my wife who is trying

to read. She points out that most practitioners are not letting

their minds wander. True, but I'm sitting tied in a knot wondering

"what is relevant"? I suppose this could be useless, maudlin or

even a dangerous thought for an artist. Except for the fact that

my art is in a fine place right now. I'm just making it; not

hesitating, over thinking, the ideas are flowing and I'm

along for the ride. The photo up top is one of my experiments

for a postcard I'm working on. Needs work, but at least I'm

in the studio butting my head against some ideas, so all is

well.

My Google result formula for mass relevancy

So, I think what's really on my mind is not what makes an artist

relevant but what makes an artist relevant to me. There are plenty of

widely recognized artists; artists that define what our understanding

of what art is or the next direction for art etc. that just haven't had

much influence on me or my work. I enjoy work by Warhol but I was

amazed that there were so many more Google results for him vs Johns

or Rauschenberg who I owe more to in understanding Pop Art. My

simple equation above doesn't do justice to those who theorize

relevancy algorithms or swarm theory. Still I have to wonder whether

the wikipedia effect isn't derailing our inner critic.