I decided to visit an art gallery called, The Hole, where certain exhibits are highlighted for a few months. When I went, Andy Dixon’s Exhibit, “Joy”, was being presented, who is a self taught contemporary Canadian artist. Dixon’s purpose was to reshuffle the original classic tropes of Greek mythology in which it portrays the taboo relationship between fine art, luxury, decadence, and patronage to demonstrate the entanglement between art and commerce. These artworks Dixon created may seem to reflect art history in Ancient Greece, but they actually curate our relationship with art history. He explores the question of what is art and what is expensive and how money distorts the history behind the painting.
This is well presented in his artwork of four hugely painted on shirts called, Moschino Zip-up (2021), Hermes Blouse (2021), Versace Shirt (2019), and Versace Blouse (2021). Dixon uses bright and contrasting colors overlapping one another to highlight the main aspects of the shirts. By using expensive brands and painting over them, he underlines the connection between art and wealth. Artists want to try to make their painting luxurious so that they can have buyers and make a profit off of what they created. Therefore, Dixon believes that the second an artist makes an artwork to get money from it, the artwork is no longer pure. The desire to have a connection or possibility of being wealthy corrupts the artist, as well as the aspect of what really makes art, art. The purpose of art is to experience your ideals and values to show others what you think, and allow them to interpret them the way they want to as well, but when artists are rewarded for what they create, does that painting have a meaning anymore. They start to simply create just to make something that will get them money. Making an artwork that only a few elites would enjoy is dissolute to the majority of regular people who want to envision the art and resonate with it. This is well described by Dixon in which he states, “You don’t like it? Well that’s just because the work is too complex for the average person to understand…”. When art becomes an object of simply making profit, then the vision behind the art is lost.
Furthermore, Dixon also emphasizes the idea of making everyday scenarios comedic whilst showing the truth behind wealth and privilege. He uses bright, flamboyant colors to exaggerate the visuals to show irony behind it. This additionally reminds me of the cultural movement during the Baroque era where there was an intense use of imagery and dramatic styles being used to demonstrate realism. An example of this would be his artwork “Yolo 🙂 (2023)” which illustrates mythological baby angels dancing around, and then “Yolo 🙁 (2023)“ which shows the dark reality of what happened through the use of memento mori skulls in replace of the angels. These artworks paired together represent the ignorance of wealthy artists and the desire to die famous. They can party and exploit the money they receive but in the end, it won’t be worth it. This reminds me of Vincent Van Gogh who never cared about parties or was arrogant about his work. He simply wanted the attention and love from a girl but he was unable to get it because he never was able to sell any paintings. Even though he died in poverty, he was able to become one of the most famous artists in the whole world. Pablo Picasso was also painting during this era and was highly famous but he never achieved a lot. He was always famous and able to sell his paintings but what Van Gogh achieved in his short career is astonishing. He was able to turn his pain and suffering into something beautiful and did not care to go down in history as a famous artist, even though that is what happened. Picasso’s art, based on the themes of Dixon’s paintings, has little meaning because it was painted to simply get money.
This exhibit was highly enlightening once I was able to read about what each of the paintings suggested and what Dixons main goal was. The exhibit, Joy, provided free Andy Dixon postcards with his artwork, as well as a sheet of paper that provided his reasoning behind his paintings. The Hole art gallery is an interesting place to visit since it only highlights one specific artist at a time so I was able to gather which paintings were his. The exhibit was well curated because each wall had one of his paintings and the walls matched the color scheme of his artworks. There also was a separate room for his humongous jackets which I was not expecting once I walked in. This exhibit was educational because I have never heard about an artist who discusses the issues between art and money and how when it’s correlated, it diminishes the meanings behind the artist’s visions. I would definitely go again to see what other small business artists have in mind since this experience made me rethink what popular artists had in mind for their art.
I really liked your interpretation of the exhibit. Those jackets are really cool! What made you decide to visit this specific museum?
I found your interpretation of Dixon’s emphasis on the intent of the artwork as opposed to the prospect of making of profit to be very well procured. I feel like in many ways, it exposes a moral predicament in the realm of art since it’s hard to definitively say whether or not a specific artist is in the wrong despite trying to make a living from their work. I also really like the Van Gogh example since his artwork seems to have a clear motif.
I really like how you included the intentions behind the artwork and how it relates to the way it can be perceived. It definitely opens up the discussion of how an artist’s intentions and the quality of their work can shift once they begin to make a profit.
I think it’s so cool that you chose another fashion exhibit. It makes me wonder about how different artists try to find new meanings in objects that we always come into contact with whether that be nature, food, animals, furniture, other clothes, and the list is endless.