You lie. I lie.
And yet I consider myself a truthful person. In fact, I take pride in characterizing myself that way, an honest person. That we live in a time when, more than ever before it’s impossible to tell truth from lies is an understatement. Our entire process for living is founded on some fundamental lies, lies which make life easier and simpler but lies nonetheless. The fact of art is so often a ‘lying’ process to reveal the truth. A painting is made of some thing or some one and we take it at face value. Of course it’s the truth, all art is essentially true, even as it lies to us.
The lie can be assumed, the truth often obscure. We really believe we know the difference between truth and lies. Yes, do photographs really show us the ‘truth’. And do paintings ‘lie’? What of a painting of a photograph or a photograph of a painting? Is it art? If it is, isn’t all art essentially true even if it lies to us to get to that truth? To really see the world, to really see art, we have to challenge ourselves to see beyond the surface, beyond our assumptions. If we are brave enough to do so we can catch glimpses of what ‘truth’ really is.
[pullquote author=”Paul X. O. Pinkman”]The lie can be assumed, the truth often obscure.[/pullquote]
When you look at my work you might ask yourself, what am I looking at? Is this a picture of something ‘real’? Is it a painting from a photograph or a photograph of a painting? We are always seeking to concretize our perceptions so we feel grounded, secure. Yet we need to know, What are these artworks based on and are they ‘real’ or deceit? To all of this I say, how much does it matter? Is a painting that looks like a photograph ‘better’ than a painting that doesn’t? Why do we so willingly ‘trust’ photographs knowing, as we do, that the lie can be assumed more often than the truth. And yet, it’s art. Isn’t all art essentially true even if it lies to us to get to the truth?