Here are some issues I wanted to tackle with this body of work.
The figurative versus the abstract in palaeoart:
In palaeoart, great value is placed upon rigid realism and figurative illustration. I wanted to show that other ways of describing extinct beings were possible, with abstract and spontaneous methods. Although definitely not as informative as figurative drawings, such pieces could still invoke a curiosity for extinct organisms in the viewer, essentially contributing to the learning of natural history.
The purposeful ignorance of science by 'post modernist' intellectuals:
Physician Alan Sokal pointed out this embarrassing fact when he got a completely nonsense essay published in the cultural studies publication Social Text. The lack of scientific peer review, or worse still, a 'cool' distrust of science itself in such liberal arts circles is still apparent. These errors are furthered by the horrifying lack of cross-disciplinary education, even in the simplest aspects of science. By grounding a seemingly abstract work in rigid biological and evolutionary science, I wanted to show that an artist doesn’t necessarily have to frown upon reality.
How our evolution influenced our art:
The dinosauroids are products of an alternative evolution which might have been all-too-real had the world's history been slightly different. The way they produce their art is a consequence of their natural history, as ours is ours. With this comparison, I’d like viewers to notice the biological heritage inherent in our arts.
How we take random events for granted:
Our social and personal lives are molded by a string of coincidences which we sometimes mistake for 'destiny' or 'fate'. By showing them an alternative world that diverged from ours at the most pivotal moment, I wanted viewers to think about how much depended on chance, and perhaps to explore other divergent worlds of their own.
How I like to run around naked, screaming like a bird with paint all over my face:
This is sad, but true.
The figurative versus the abstract in palaeoart:
In palaeoart, great value is placed upon rigid realism and figurative illustration. I wanted to show that other ways of describing extinct beings were possible, with abstract and spontaneous methods. Although definitely not as informative as figurative drawings, such pieces could still invoke a curiosity for extinct organisms in the viewer, essentially contributing to the learning of natural history.
The purposeful ignorance of science by 'post modernist' intellectuals:
Physician Alan Sokal pointed out this embarrassing fact when he got a completely nonsense essay published in the cultural studies publication Social Text. The lack of scientific peer review, or worse still, a 'cool' distrust of science itself in such liberal arts circles is still apparent. These errors are furthered by the horrifying lack of cross-disciplinary education, even in the simplest aspects of science. By grounding a seemingly abstract work in rigid biological and evolutionary science, I wanted to show that an artist doesn’t necessarily have to frown upon reality.
How our evolution influenced our art:
The dinosauroids are products of an alternative evolution which might have been all-too-real had the world's history been slightly different. The way they produce their art is a consequence of their natural history, as ours is ours. With this comparison, I’d like viewers to notice the biological heritage inherent in our arts.
How we take random events for granted:
Our social and personal lives are molded by a string of coincidences which we sometimes mistake for 'destiny' or 'fate'. By showing them an alternative world that diverged from ours at the most pivotal moment, I wanted viewers to think about how much depended on chance, and perhaps to explore other divergent worlds of their own.
How I like to run around naked, screaming like a bird with paint all over my face:
This is sad, but true.
