I just managed to finish watching a documentary on Yoshitomo Nara called "A to Z, Traveling with Yoshitomo Nara". It features the behind the scene of Yoshitomo Nara's exhibitions around the world as well as his daily lifestyle. A up-closed and personal encounter with one of the most well-known contemporary artist of Japan now.
Yoshitomo Nara is well-known for his portraits of devilish-looking children, usually done closeup. Nara first came to the fore of the art world during Japan’s Pop art movement in the 1990s. The subject matter of his sculptures and paintings is deceptively simple: most works depict one seemingly innocuous subject (often pastel-hued children and animals drawn with confident, cartoonish lines) with little or no background. But these children, who appear at first to be cute and even vulnerable, sometimes brandish weapons like knives and saws. Their wide eyes often hold accusatory looks that could be sleepy-eyed irritation at being awoken from a nap—or that could be undiluted expressions of hate.
Nara, however, does not see his weapon-wielding subjects as aggressors. "Look at them, they [the weapons] are so small, like toys. Do you think they could fight with those?" he says. "I don’t think so. Rather, I kind of see the children among other, bigger, bad people all around them, who are holding bigger knives…"[2]
Sometimes, the artist says, he receives zealous messages from fans. One even slipped a note into his pocket. I know exactly what you are saying, the note said, I understand. "Maybe they understand more about the work than me," he says modestly.
What is it about this art that elicits such a strong response? It doesn’t seem very complicated. The style is intentionally flat, with blunt, uniformly thick lines. This, combined with a lack of modeling, texture or strong coloration, seems to force attention to the subject matter. Yet there isn’t much of that. Narrative content? Not much of that either. Expressiveness? Not really.
Nara’s artwork "clicks" because we sense that beneath the sparse execution is a direct portal to a personal, almost intuitive vision.
"I only draw what I know from experience," Nara says. Since they embody specific memories, or impressions, the works take on a marshmallowy snapshot quality. Like illustrations from a deranged children’s textbook ("S is for Switchblade...") they are narratives, but with no temporal start or finish. As such, the works have an almost totemic completeness.
Stylistically, an artist can do two very brave things in their careers: a Picasso-like switching between unrecognizable styles, or a Morandi-like pursuit of the same relentless vision (the challenge here is to maintain a pitch of intensity across a long line of similar works). It could be said that Nara falls into the second category.
The artist says he has no choice in the matter; he is compelled to do these images: "Even if I try to draw something different, it always comes out this way."
His hand moves reflexively over the canvas, and the image emerges almost of itself. This has inspired some to call what Nara does a form of "automatism." Despite the implied mediumistic overtones, the artist sees this impulse as ultimately coming from himself.
Lauded by art critics and hipsters alike, Nara’s bizarrely intriguing works have gained him a cult following around the world.
After watching thoughts:
From the documentary, I felt that Nara is really a gem in the arts scene in Japan. He felt so child-like, as though he became famous without realizing it. Nara came across as a very humble person. A middle-aged man who refuses to grow up, someone who wants to live in the past, in his childhood.
It seem like many artists have an difficulty in expressing themselves in the crowd that is why they chose to use art as a form of communication. To really express how they feel.....
More read-up on the Artist : KultureFlash Interview
About the illustrator:
Posts
