Artist statements and post-modern gibberish

I am part of a group show that starts touring some select Southern states in about a month (for more about it go to http://www.ikarosartcollective.com/index2.php?v=v1#/home/ ). Amongst the materials I am required to provide the artist statement is the most difficult to create. I am always torn between writing something that is genuine and means something to me and writing some pile of highly intellectualized garbage that lies about both the art and the artist and constructs a barrier between the original intentions of the art and the artifice that is ultimately fed to the viewer.

That being said, this time I opted to write something that means something. It's honest and relatively personal with minimal amounts of pretense. I'm happy with it for the most part. Certainly happier with it then I have been with any previous artist statements. At the same time I feel a little self conscious about it. As though I am bearing too much in a forum which is usually dedicated to educated dishonesty about art.

My artist statement it below:

"The main theme of Dahmus’s[1] essay on Lyotardist narrative is the bridge between society and class. But if the materialist paradigm of context holds, we have to choose between subcultural conceptualism and precapitalist deconstruction.

In the works of Gibson, a predominant concept is the distinction between masculine and feminine. The materialist paradigm of context implies that society, somewhat ironically, has objective value. It could be said that Debord suggests the use of dialectic nihilism to attack outdated, elitist perceptions of class.

Von Junz[2] suggests that we have to choose between the materialist paradigm of context and submaterial semanticism. Therefore, the characteristic theme of the works of Pynchon is the defining characteristic, and subsequent fatal flaw, of dialectic sexuality. "


Just kidding. That's post-modern gibberish generated by Post-Modern generator which can be found here: http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/

I actually think the randomly generated block of text above is similar in many regards to a lot of the artist statements I have been reading lately. But without further ado; here is my artist statement.

I like creating something that doesn’t really exist - a physical representation of a fantasy or dream. I begin an image usually with a vision or a sketch from a dream. From there I cast a model and build the environment in which the image is to take place. I often invent lighting schemes and camera techniques to support the realization of my images. These settings do not exist and so I cannot use traditional means to document them. I must go outside the normal boundaries of how a camera is used and instead use it’s unique characteristics to distort and blur reality in order to create my images.

I do my work because it is the only way I can communicate these beautiful visions to the world. They are my representations of sex, and the beauty I see in it. When I create, I am reminded that the vision inside of me is larger than the sum of the individual parts that are invested in its creation. I view being able to create as a profound gift and the remarkable amount of trust and support that it takes to create my images is reflected in the intimacy present within them.

Currently, I’m trying to refine the language I use to communicate my dreams. I want to increase the impact and potency of my images. I am exploring how far I can bring the camera into my dreams and how well I can document things that don’t exist and have never happened. I am exploring people’s reactions to these things and using their perceptions of the camera as an archival truth-teller to confuse and disorient the viewer into believing that these ephemeral apparitions exist in the material realm. When people see my work I would like them to use it to reflect upon their own attitudes about sex and beauty and to see that it is an intimate part of me, which I am sharing with the world.