Hooray! I love to see Whatsiters’ original art, hear their music, read their poetry . . . as much as possible! (Hint, hint to everyone.) Thanks for posting this, Lane. Wish we could see it even larger! The bird circle is especially fetching.
The colours and psycho-fantasy composition are really excellent. They look great but I’m now so curious. Sorry for all the questions, but I need the computer blog-technology that gives me a 3-D view and answer my inquiries. I want to see the layers (how many?). Is the paint on the paper and then laser cut and front mounted on the glass? Is there etching on the front glass or a drop shadow on a back layer once mounting is complete? The second side image gives an illusion of that sort of set-up.
BTW, these images just made my Monday 100% better.
These are very painterly. They almost seem to defy the description of materials and process. They’re cut paper? Air-brushed? Or are all those impressionistic swirls part of the cut?
Hey Lane, gore or your own art – I love you for who you are. Crazy and eccentric is your personal trait and that’s what makes your art so much more special. You are a braver version of all of our Literacy writers. It’s so easy to write a post, which would get so many comments, but so difficult to throw something out there that would make all of us oh so uncomfortable. I believe that in some sense, good art should reveal emotions in us, which we are not willing to admit even to ourselves. Not that I’m trying to encourage that last week’s pic, I am just saying, I understand the purpose.
Awesome, Beautiful, Amazing. Three years of work. The thing that always hits me about your papercuttings are the obvious work that you’ve put into them. The time, the effort, the thought, the planning. I love artwork that’s accidental as well; a happy accident, if you will, but sometimes that sort of work looks like it’s been splashed onto a canvas and promptly handed to the dealer. Thought through, perhaps, but much less effort required.
poke, poke. That’s my uncle–I’m related to the creator of those brilliant colors. Isn’t he cool?
“You are a braver version of all of our Literacy writers. It’s so easy to write a post, which would get so many comments, but so difficult to throw something out there that would make all of us oh so uncomfortable.”
From now on, Natasha, I will look to you as my guide and wonder, “What would Natasha do? Would she write an easy post to get numerous comments, or would she post a bloody photo in order to make people uncomfortable?” Thank you! It’s not every writer that gets such an intimate look into her or his audience’s mind.
hey thanks everyone, nice to read something about this post.
yes they are cut on a laser cutter, each window has a number of laminate sheets which are painted in a trade secret process, and arranged in a way as to provide views of both the front and back. so there are actually alot more photos. I’ll spare you.
there isn’t anything on the glass, everything is inside.
anyway, thanks everyone, nice to hear from all 12 of you!
“Would she write an easy post to get numerous comments, or would she post a bloody photo in order to make people uncomfortable?”
I would do none of the above. I do not consider either getting “numerous comments” or making “people uncomfortable” art. I already stated that I was neither trying to encourage last week’s pictures, nor did I think it was art unless it came with quotes from “Facts and Fancies of Medical Life,” “The Fall of the House of Usher,” “The Elixir of Life” “Dracula” “The Tempest”…you get the idea. In fact, it would have been very appropriate considering the impending Halloween. I still respect Lane’s choices.
Apart from your delightful sarcasms, you are posing some very interesting questions: the morbid side of the artistic craft, the darker facets of ingenuity, the things that would astound and shock, rather than please and fascinate. Can an artist regard his audience as simply the means to his goal? Can an artist disrespect? Does the final result justify the means? Where do we draw the line?
“It’s not every writer that gets such an intimate look into her or his audience’s mind.”
Don’t you?
Fit for a Celestial Room.
Was this cut on the Crikut machine? Just kidding, your work is always very cool. You must be a smoker to have that much patience…
Hooray! I love to see Whatsiters’ original art, hear their music, read their poetry . . . as much as possible! (Hint, hint to everyone.) Thanks for posting this, Lane. Wish we could see it even larger! The bird circle is especially fetching.
Thank you for sharing, Lane. As the Monday Photo goes, this is a massive improvement from last week!
i know, i think i was trying to apologize.
1. or a homeless shelter.
yay, lane!
beautiful side of awesome, check.
I love love.
The colours and psycho-fantasy composition are really excellent. They look great but I’m now so curious. Sorry for all the questions, but I need the computer blog-technology that gives me a 3-D view and answer my inquiries. I want to see the layers (how many?). Is the paint on the paper and then laser cut and front mounted on the glass? Is there etching on the front glass or a drop shadow on a back layer once mounting is complete? The second side image gives an illusion of that sort of set-up.
BTW, these images just made my Monday 100% better.
Yeah, what Autumn said. I wish I could see them in real life – the computer doesn’t do it justice. I feel like a dog trying to read a book.
These are very painterly. They almost seem to defy the description of materials and process. They’re cut paper? Air-brushed? Or are all those impressionistic swirls part of the cut?
The Grand Army Plaza one is especially cool.
Hey Lane, gore or your own art – I love you for who you are. Crazy and eccentric is your personal trait and that’s what makes your art so much more special. You are a braver version of all of our Literacy writers. It’s so easy to write a post, which would get so many comments, but so difficult to throw something out there that would make all of us oh so uncomfortable. I believe that in some sense, good art should reveal emotions in us, which we are not willing to admit even to ourselves. Not that I’m trying to encourage that last week’s pic, I am just saying, I understand the purpose.
Did you already name them? I don’t see the titles.
Awesome, Beautiful, Amazing. Three years of work. The thing that always hits me about your papercuttings are the obvious work that you’ve put into them. The time, the effort, the thought, the planning. I love artwork that’s accidental as well; a happy accident, if you will, but sometimes that sort of work looks like it’s been splashed onto a canvas and promptly handed to the dealer. Thought through, perhaps, but much less effort required.
poke, poke. That’s my uncle–I’m related to the creator of those brilliant colors. Isn’t he cool?
“You are a braver version of all of our Literacy writers. It’s so easy to write a post, which would get so many comments, but so difficult to throw something out there that would make all of us oh so uncomfortable.”
From now on, Natasha, I will look to you as my guide and wonder, “What would Natasha do? Would she write an easy post to get numerous comments, or would she post a bloody photo in order to make people uncomfortable?” Thank you! It’s not every writer that gets such an intimate look into her or his audience’s mind.
By the way, that was me.
hey thanks everyone, nice to read something about this post.
yes they are cut on a laser cutter, each window has a number of laminate sheets which are painted in a trade secret process, and arranged in a way as to provide views of both the front and back. so there are actually alot more photos. I’ll spare you.
there isn’t anything on the glass, everything is inside.
anyway, thanks everyone, nice to hear from all 12 of you!
“Would she write an easy post to get numerous comments, or would she post a bloody photo in order to make people uncomfortable?”
I would do none of the above. I do not consider either getting “numerous comments” or making “people uncomfortable” art. I already stated that I was neither trying to encourage last week’s pictures, nor did I think it was art unless it came with quotes from “Facts and Fancies of Medical Life,” “The Fall of the House of Usher,” “The Elixir of Life” “Dracula” “The Tempest”…you get the idea. In fact, it would have been very appropriate considering the impending Halloween. I still respect Lane’s choices.
Apart from your delightful sarcasms, you are posing some very interesting questions: the morbid side of the artistic craft, the darker facets of ingenuity, the things that would astound and shock, rather than please and fascinate. Can an artist regard his audience as simply the means to his goal? Can an artist disrespect? Does the final result justify the means? Where do we draw the line?
“It’s not every writer that gets such an intimate look into her or his audience’s mind.”
Don’t you?
“Apart from your delightful sarcasms, you are posing some very interesting questions…”
Thanks for giving me so much credit, but I was just going for the sarcasm part.
Me too :) Sorry about misleading you on that extra credit stuff. Peace, bro:)