I thought instead of wasting my time explaining a certain work on socials I would just note it on this site. The work in question was painted digitally before being painted on a wall as part of a collaborative effort. I went for a messier digital style working with loose lines rather than the way people go for colour field or design-type solutions. I am not bagging that kind of work but explaining my own philosophy which is based on the artist’s hand. In 2003 I did a series of slick digitally inspired works that were about hiding the artist’s hand in technology. At the same time, my own hand style still came through but it was more about technology.

In 2003 technology was a promise of sorts whereas today it has taken over everything, even our minds. That is why I subverted the expected narrative and went for something people wouldn’t think was digitally created. Nobody understands mainly because I never bothered explaining the process but even then who would care. For me, though as an artist I found it comforting to go against the grain and it is a slight glitch aesthetic without the contrast needed for true glitch work. That is the contrast between the super slick and some kind of stylised glitch.

That kind of approach people would be ok I understand that, but how well did you manage to do it? Did you do it right? Is it a solid convincing attempt at the narrative? Seems like the story of art today. Does it fit? Where does it fit? I thought a glitch was an unexpected undefined issue rather than an aesthetic. You could argue that Jackson Pollock is a glitch artist of sorts but he didn’t have the right aesthetic. Frank Stella’s work from the 60s is glitchy, they were undefined, the unexpected now they are part of the canon.  That is what I mean by a glitch. It wasn’t meant to happen but it did and people took notice.

People wanted a new world, now we are in the new world we only want a surface, a working solution. Yet it isn’t a solution but a status quo. A commercially driven set of decor. Everyone has become a commercial artist, the starving artist trope has starved to death and is homeless. They are stuck in a grind seven days a week just to survive. How can you make art in Sydney today without a product to sell? Graffiti art is meant for the street only because that is how people see it. The graffiti artists mostly, if you have other concerns your work will not belong anywhere.