Art exists for humans to consider the real world in ways that simple objectives views can’t do – from the inside. We cannot ‘Other’ people or events when we see the world through their experiences.
Viewing the world from the ‘Other’ perspective, can teach us something about the roots of violence or the trappings of injustice. Through art, we can interrogate the atrocities in the world. You cannot ignore a tumour (well, you can of course, but consider the consequences).
Through art, we can hopefully gain a deeper understanding about criminal events or use it to scrutinize the injustices that occur daily within our society. My intention is to use the work of artists to shed light on the darker side of society by engaging the issues critically and with some humanity.
eden art
March 19, 2017
Hello Couch. Your blogs are thought provoking and your ethos is interesting. I am particularly interested in your view on art and the effect / aesthetic transference on the viewer, as well as the concept of art as sublimation… I would like to quote you if I may (for my thesis), I would appreciate knowing what references you draw from for your articles; especially the Gacy work. I am a clinical Art Psychotherapist trainee working in a forensic setting. Many thanks, Eden
LikeLiked by 1 person
spottedcouchblog
March 20, 2017
Hello Eden. Thank you so much for your comments.
You are free to quote me, but I am not an expert in this area in any way, shape or form. My analysis of Gacy’s artwork is strictly a personal one. I interpreted his artwork based on my own experience and education as an artist (BFA and MFA) combined with my interest in psychology and crime. And of course, the general research I have done on his crimes and art work.
Your area of study sounds very interesting and I would like to learn more about your thesis.
To be honest, I hadn’t given deep thought to the idea of transference on the viewer, although that is what I was clearly exploring with my analysis.On a personal level, I do believe that art can provide a window into the unconscious/subconscious. I am convinced, based on my own aesthetic interpretation, that Gacy’s work reveals much about his psyche. However, such an idea is only guess work on my part. If he was not a serial killer, I am not sure I would have examined or interpreted his art work in the way that I have because context is everything.
Kind regards,
Lissa
LikeLike
spottedcouchblog
March 20, 2017
As an addition to my previous comment, Gacy’s work is not remarkable in any way from an artistic/aesthetic point of view. If he wasn’t a serial killer, I would not have pondered or given his art much consideration (aesthetically and definitely not art historically). The intent of the article was to consider his art work (aesthetic, content, etc.) within the context of knowing that he was a serial a killer. Hindsight is everything, right?
LikeLike
spottedcouchblog
March 20, 2017
The other question to ask is whether my interpretation of Gacy’s artwork was simply a projection based on what I knew of him as a serial killer? Something to ponder …
LikeLike