This first picture is probably my favorite. The trick was careful focus, low ISO, and a wide aperture (2.0). I was also using a tripod.

I just like the composition here. I shouldn’t try to point out flaws, but were I to take this picture again, I would move the miniature cheese grater between the two cups. Besides being fairly useless in general, it just distracts from the picture.

The colors of those tomatoes have absolutely not been adjusted. It’s so neon it’s almost hard on the eyes. Go ahead, stare at it for a minute. The lighting in the kitchen (just before sunset) and the low ISO are probably responsible here. Check out that shine! Finally, that soap is just so pink, isn’t it?

Hope you appreciate this rather mindless content here on vdov.

The painting is very somber, almost depressing. It depicts a man with very little definition walking away from the point of view of the painter. The color palate is very dark, as I remember. I would estimate that only 15% of the frame is taken up with the walking man and the rest by his surroundings on the street he is traveling down. This is how I remember the painting, though I never fully studied it and my memory could be very flawed. But, he’s definitely walking away from the point of view of the painter.

If I could remember who showed that painting to me (over 4 years ago now), I would just email him/her. My memory is not that good.

Cheers.

A month or so ago I was sitting around the Christmas tree at my home in Oregon with my parents, siblings and some extended family of the Beardsworth variety (David, Helen, Michael and Kathleen), who were in visiting Bend from Eugene. Michael is an avid technologist and brought up the then-current introduction of various “E-Book” reading devices. My personal feeling at the time was that these devices were utter crap. However, I didn’t have any particularly well codified intellectual framework for feeling this way, so as is often the case with things that come out of my mouth I rationalized my views on the fly, pulling from anything and everything at the top of my head. This neurological transport is often aided by the introduction of alcohol into my bloodstream, and this case was no exception. At some point during the conversation, I said something to this effect: “E-Books create a new problem where none exists”. This statement may seem at first glance to have no real value, but the point of my comment was to suggest that the consumption of penned books doesn’t suffer from a content consumption problem and that the physical property associated with reading has inherent value. I did, and still, feel this way. I have always loved books, even when they are nothing more than a set of reference documents sitting gathering dust on my shelf. I find reading developed literature and non-fiction in digital form to be somewhat atrocious (yes, I still print out every scientific article I read), and much prefer to have the book in my hands.

“E-Books create a new problem where none exists”. Interesting. It would suggest that there is no inherent value in the digital distribution of large bodies of work, and that the introduction of such a mechanism has major flaws. Certainly it does have major flaws. Digital property rights (on which I have strong feelings but will not discuss them here in any detail), digital distribution, content protection; These are all important topics the majority of which are not yet well developed in our country or in others. So is there some historical precedent on which to judge the value of a paradigm shift from real property distribution to that of digital distribution in something as fundamentally important to our society as literature? Eureka! Music! Let’s take a look.

Since the decline of 19th century classical romanticism and the introduction of the phonograph, the consumption of music by the body public has been inexorably tied to technology. Previously to the 20th century the only method for hearing music was to do one of two things: create music yourself, or go to a concert. Both of these have obvious value even still: the music in my ears right now is being created on real guitars by real people who are doing so for their own enjoyment, and concert-going has a long and uninterrupted tradition throughout all musical disciplines. The record was king in this time of musical upheaval. It may not have been the best system, but it was a decent solution. And music being as important as it is to millennia of civilized human beings, an incredible community was created around the idea of the ‘record’ and perhaps specifically the idea of a codified set of individual works which made up an ‘album’. Incredible. And for quite some time, the album remained king.

It can I think be reasonably argued that the movement of music into the digital realm was necessary and obvious. Even though music was distributed through the sale of a physical product through years past, it was still connected to some mechanism for its translation from the physical product into something that that could be consumed. Thus the art itself was preserved and its basic understanding by the consumer was no different regardless of the mechanism of retrieval. Now of course, it is easy to copy digital content and the idea of a digital work as physical property is horribly flawed, but this leads me down a discussion path to which I will not venture in this post. For sake of discussion I will lump the CD and the digital MP3 download into the same category as they both suffer from these problems. They are both digital content.

This new retrieval mechanism for musical art did, as its predecessor (the vinyl record), have a major impact on the object of artistic desire. Previously it was personal creation and concert-going, which then transitioned into consumption of a physical record or album. Albums themselves had obvious worth: they were the vehicle by which the art was transformed from an abstract encoding into something you and I could actually hear. Perhaps this is much in the same way that the art museum is the vehicle for the consumption of priceless works of visual art. But the introduction of digital content moved the ball into a whole new regime: the album is no longer king. There is no longer a physical vehicle through which music is consumed. None at all. And so what becomes of the album? It dies. It has been dying and will continue to do so. Songs are now sound bytes and albums are now just a collection of songs (An acquaintance of a friend once said to me “You know albums are just a bunch of songs right? You don’t have to get the whole album!” Yes I do, Mr. acquaintance, and you’re an idiot). Much of the music elite in this country and others will tell you that an album is much more than just a collection of songs and sound bytes. Guess what? They’re right. For now. But as has happened previously with any invention of a new content-delivery system, the previous structure that once stood so tall and proud as the be-all-end-all of musical desire will gradually wither away until it is a faint memory for most and an elite preoccupation for few. Perhaps I fit into that elite category; Music is one of the most important influences in my life and I still store all my music in album form (though digitally). I will continue to do so.

So what does this have to do with books and “E-Books” (I still die a little inside each time I hear that phrase, so I quote it every time). Let’s examine the content consumption mechanism of books with perhaps slightly less intent that for music, simply because the subject historically is far easier to understand. In the year 1440, goldsmith Johann Gutenberg invented the printing press. And we haven’t looked back since. The dominant form of literature (and non-fiction) consumption has been and continues to be the printed word. Printing presses have become more complex and more efficient and applied to huge range of content. Newspapers, books, magazines … there isn’t a point in listing them all. Any reader will certainly understand its significance. And, like the record of the 20th century’s effect on music, over the last near-600 years consumption of the printed word is the single most significant mechanism for which thought and information has been presented to the public. The community that has sprung up around the printed word perhaps isn’t even worth mentioning in the same light as that associated with the musical album only because it is so unbelievably significant that no blog post can ever attempt to do it any justice. It transcends volumes of possible discussion. The shear voracity with which the printed word is regarded in civilized society is no foreign concept to any even remotely educated person. Even I suffer from the “endless library” problem. I love to have books just because I love having books. There is something about a physical collection of printed knowledge that is almost mysterious. I can’t explain it, but I have no problem letting it exploit me. For the purposes of this discussion though, it is only necessary to understand that the book, the printed word, is the vehicle, and you and I are the train station.

“E-Books create a new problem where none exists”. What happens when we move the printed word into the digital age (let’s forget about digital rights and digital property for the time being)? Perhaps the best known example of this in current discussion around the world is the “newspaper problem”. I put it in quotes only because I have no idea what a person educated in the field would call this (though perhaps my father John could better define the problem, as he is a very successful and well-established newspaper editor). Other examples (books to “e-books”, magazines to “e-magazines”) are equally well discussed within this framework and my take on it will be as general as possible.

The musical album used to be the purchased content. Now we buy individual songs, and it could be well argued that this system isn’t working all too well (or at least the RIAA would have you believe that — they’re may be right through the lens of the “old” distribution system). In the realm of the printed word, the vehicle of consumption was the physical product. It was the book, the magazine, the newspaper. When you bought one of these items, you weren’t buying it for a specific sentence, phrase, paragraph, chapter or article. The purchase of such a physical item was in fact the transfer your confidence that the physical vehicle had inherent value (I’m overusing the word ‘physical’ here, but with good reason). And almost 600 years of experience tells me that in fact, we were right. The physical vehicle great value which greatly exceeded the collected worth of the individual printed words. I would argue that this is in fact true of the music album. Albums, as any elite music connoisseur will tell you, have a worth that far exceeds the sum of its parts. When you buy a book or magazine or newspaper, you are not only summing its parts; You are putting your faith in the creation of that work as an intellectual object that has inherent value. What an incredible concept.

So for me to read an article (or, because of digital content restrictions read the first two paragraphs of said article) in the Wall Street Journal titled “Publisher Tests Selling by the Chapter” brings to me great distress. Like the album became song snippets and cell phone ring tones, book chapters will no longer be available as a small but integral part of a consistent body of work, but rather as small, insignificant objects to be judged on their own merit. How absurd. (Warning: sentence fragment ahead) The idea that we will enter complacently into a new era where a collected work no longer has value. Ridiculous. I have consistently resisted the destruction of the musical album, and I will be damned if I won’t do the same for the printed word.

I am quite sure that the people responsible for this brand new marketing idea are simply understanding a general trend and following suit. But at what cost? What are we willing to sacrifice? The longstanding traditions of the printed world are one of the fundamental driving forces in our society. These traditions are arguably among the most important single concepts in this history of mankind. Certainly I am not suggesting that the introduction of digital literature and the segmentation of the printed word will destroy the intellectual precedents upon which we base our society. And I would argue that the length and significance of the history of the printed word will necessarily slow its conversion into a group of only intellectual snippets. I hope I die before this transition takes full force in the same way that the album has been destroyed. But maybe tomorrow, maybe next week, maybe a month from now, it will be possible for you to buy and own rights to a digital copy of only “Leviticus” from the Hebrew Bible, Old Testament and the Torah.

What a sad day that will be.

—

A caveat: I am a huge open-access proponent and technologist. I spent the majority of my life dealing with technology in one way or another, whether that be how I think intellectual knowledge should be distributed or how to do a finite element calculation in a complex geometry where chaos in interfaces is important. This is my first attempt at a discussion of this problem, and my thoughts may not be totally clear. The major point of this post is to spur discussion. I want to talk about this with smart people, and if you think I’m horribly misguided, I want you to rip my ideas apart. I’m not kidding.

• LSI Guide to Lock Picking: A Locksport Primer

Materials:
1 piece of decent looking wood, 1/2″- 1″ thick. (I used pine, 72″x 24″x 1/2″) [$20]
4 14″ long pieces of 4×4 posts [$5]
8 1/2″ corner brackets with wood fasteners (less than 1/2″ long…these usually come with bracket) [$1.29 ea]

Tools:
Hand drill with phillips head drill bit

Notes:
Home Depot will cut the 4″x 4″ post into pieces for you. I used a 14″ length because the window seat is 16″ high and I wanted the table to be slightly lower. You can use whatever height you want, but if you go much higher than two feet, I would suggest putting a square support about halfway down the legs of your table so that it will not twist when it is leaned on, etc. But for a coffee table, these instructions should be fine.

The table shown here is unfinished wood. It would certainly look nicer if the wood were sanded, stained, and varnished, but I didn’t want to spend the time or money to do this (yet). If you have this equipment laying around your house, go for it.

Instructions:
1. Attach the brackets to the legs of the table.
*Note: it is easier to do this step first so that you can always be drilling down towards the floor, which is easier.

–lay a bracket in the middle of one end of a 4″x 4″ leg so that the other side of the bracket is on the same line as the cut across the post and facing upward (see photo).

–drill the 3 fasteners into the holes in the bracket, making sure to keep the bracket in place while drilling. (The slower you drill, the easier it is to get the screws to go in straight without mauling them.)

–rotate the leg by 90º and repeat these steps (see photo for placement of brackets).

–repeat all of these steps for each of the four legs of the table.

2. Attach the legs to the surface of the table.
–with the underside of the table surface pointing up, set a leg flush with one corner of the surface, with the brackets facing in so that they sit on top of the wood.

–after the leg has been aligned with the edge of the table, screw one fastener into each bracket. This should secure the position of the leg on the table.

–drill the remaining fasteners into their positions on the brackets.

–repeat for each of the four legs of the table, aligning the legs with each of the four corners of the underside of the table’s surface.

3. Invert and admire.
–your table is finished.

Anyhow, my sister and I were pondering our large-empty-space, low-budget problems (and recognizing that there was no possibility of solving either problem with big cheap couches) while sitting in the window seat of a downtown Providence Starbucks. Now, wait…we can bring materials up the stairwell… 12 cinder blocks and 32 square feet of particle board later the project had started.

Materials:
12 16″ long cinder blocks (6″x 8″x 16″) [$1.25 ea]
1 4′x 8′ sheet of particle board [$17.99]
64 sq ft of scrap carpeting foam [$30]
2 2′x 9′ pieces of upholstery foam [$10 ea]
17′ of upholstery fabric (54″ wide–pretty standard) [$11]
6 pieces of scrap cardboard (~22″x 8″ ea)

Tools:
Staple gun [$4]
Staples [$1.25]
Sewing machine (optional)
Scissors

Useful notes on supplies:
The listed equipment would be used to exactly duplicate what I have built. Use some math to convert to the space available for your window seat. The prices in brackets are what I paid for the above items. The cinder blocks, particle board, and carpeting foam were purchased at Home Depot. I would suggest eliminating the cost of the carpeting foam by going to a carpet store and asking for scrap pieces, as they do not need to be whole or new (though clean would be a bonus). You may be tempted to eliminate the use carpeting foam altogether, but I would warn against that as it really does add to the comfort of the bench, being a much denser foam than the upholstery foam. The upholstery foam is sold in those exact standard package sizes at Walmart, the fabric I bought was on sale (also at Walmart). You could use recycled fabric, or any kind of fabric really, as long as it is pretty durable and not too thin. It is also beneficial to have whole pieces of fabric (to fit the whole bench) to save time and eyesores. The staple gun was the second cheapest one at Walmart and worked just fine for its purpose. You could also rent one of these at Home Depot, but it’s probably not worth it.

Home Depot will cut your particle board into pieces for you. My pieces are 24″x 92″ and 24″x 76″. A 2′ width works well because of the standard upholstery foam size I found at Walmart and also allowed for efficient use of the 54″ wide fabric (24″ wide for benches + 16″ high for the skirt = 40″, which leaves 14″ for folding under and stapling)–though fortuitous, this was not planned but governed by the width of the particle board sheet being 4′ and the decision to just slice it in half.

Instructions:
1. Preparing.
–plan and measure the dimensions of your window seat.

–cut particle board (or have it cut) into desired dimensions.

–adjust material quantities for your specifications (2 cinder blocks for every 2.5′ or so, etc).

2. Foaming.
–attach one layer of carpeting foam to the top of the bench with a staple gun—flush to the edges of the particle board. (Sparsely stapled is okay: this step has no relevance to the durability of the final product.) Attaching this foam piecewise is fine, since you will be putting more foam on top of it; however, one big piece is probably easier to work with/staple.

–lay another layer of carpeting foam on top of the first. It is unlikely that you will be able to staple this on, but it will be sandwiched pretty well.

–cut the upholstery foam to length and lay it on top of the 2nd layer of carpeting foam. For rounded edges, leave 2” of foam hanging over the edge to be rounded. This layer is also secured only by the fabric on top of it.

–repeat for each piece of particle board

3. Upholstering.
–leaving 6″ on each edge, cut the fabric to the size of the bench (or, foamed piece of particle board at this step…).

–lay the fabric evenly on top of the foam–making sure that it overlaps every edge by at least 6″.

–flip the bench over. It is very important that the fabric remains taut and does not wrinkle during the flip; be extra careful here in order to achieve a tight fit (i.e. borrow a friend to help).

–choose a side of the board to start stapling (a long side to start is easier). Fold the fabric over onto the particle board and hold firmly in place.

–staple the fabric to the particle board. The staples should be an inch or two from the edge and about 6″ apart (see photo to right). Be careful to smooth the fabric prior to each time you staple to avoid wrinkles.

–at the corners of the bench, fold the fabric as if you were wrapping a present and continue stapling (see photo).

–when all the egdes have been stapled, flip the bench back over and admire (optional- you’re just going to flip the bench back over in the next step).

4. Skirting.
*Note: This is the only step that requires some actual (though minor) skill…and a sewing machine. If you don’t have a sewing machine (or a sewer) available, try using some iron-on device (such as Stitch Witchery) to make the seam.

–cut to length of desired skirt a 20″ wide piece of fabric (for 16″ high cinderblocks). *note: make sure to include the length of any corner/edge that you would like the skirt to hide. Cut the fabric to the length of the entire exposed edge of the bench.

–along one edge, fold 1″ of the fabric onto itself (with the good side showing on the fold–see photo, right) and sew a straight seam with a 1/2″ seam allowance.

–lay the (unsewn) edge of the fabic upside-down over the edge of the (inverted) bench that will face into the room. (such that it will hang down in front of the cinder blocks when stapled: see photo, right) Make sure to align fabric with bench so that 16″ of it will hang down in front of the bench when inverted.

–staple fabric at the very edge of the particle board (it’s full of glue and has no grain, so there is little chance of the bond failing); this way, the fabric will hang from the edge of the seat instead of an inch or two back, which would look pretty funny.

–repeat for each bench.

Your bench should now look something like this:

5. Heightening.
–cut 6 pieces of scrap cardboard to size (~22″x 8″ for this bench)

–decide where the cinder blocks should sit underneath the bench (about 2.5′ apart seems to work well to eliminate bowing when weight is added in between blocks) and set the cardboard in these places.

–place 2 cinder blocks at each end of every piece of cardboard.

–lift and invert bench(es) (four hands are much better than two in this step).

–set your new window seat into place, arrange the skirt to hide the cinder blocks, and admire.

*Note: The bottom picture on the right shows the arrangement of cinder blocks under my window seat. There is one set of blocks missing in the middle of the short bench.

6. Decorating.
–the comfort of your new window seat is increased exponentially with each added throw pillow. (However these are not included in the cost estimate above.)

Enjoy! Have a cup of coffee and read a magazine over there. Throw a party and watch, amazed, as everyone isn’t wandering around your place fruitlessly trying to find a place to sit. Build a simple coffee table to go with your new designer window seat—oh wait, that’s the next project. Stay tuned…

I took these like two weeks ago…but what are you going to do? There is a park down on the tip of the East Providence peninsula called Colt State Park. Most of the pictures are from there, some of them are also from a dock area where I was probably trespassing, but the locals just waved and smiled, glad someone was taking notice of their beautiful little corner of the earth. Or something.

There is also another new album which is a series of pictures I took of a very funny bird and his friend. This is where the square thumbnails really get in my way because you’re supposed to see all pictures at the same time, and I’d have to do something weird like combine them all in photoshop to make that possible here. So appreciation of this album has become a project for your imagination.

On another note, I’d really like to do some portraits, so if anyone in RI is interested, let me know (yes, the state is that small).

Having ranted about the new videos, I will also say that the videos are very different from their live shows, and in order to fully experience these sick individuals, you need to go see their show. In Santa Monica, CA, if you’re around (full info here).

By the way, these photos are for sale. I haven’t heard from anyone interested yet, and I don’t actually know if I will, but what with me being hopelessly unemployed and all, I will now adopt the temporary title of ’starving artist’ and hope someone will help me make some money this summer. There is potential of a $200 profit here, people. (By the way, with the work involved, this is pitifully insignificant. I will not complain, though, if you want to buy my work.)

The frames are handmade, and look like this:

small (11×14“): $50

large (16×20“): $70

The prints are all 8×12“ and matted. If you want one of these, please let me know, shollen (at) vdov (dot) net. The ones that I have already framed are in this album [soon to link to an album] of my (newly updated and beautiful ©acosta) gallery. However I will be happy to print and frame any of the items in my gallery for you at the same prices above. Add like $5 every time you bump up the print size and if you want it framed differently, I can do that, but since I buy the separate materials for the above framing process and do it myself, it is cheaper. Maybe someday I’ll set up (or get help setting up) a more streamlined way of selling these. If there is any interest whatsoever. But, c’mon people, I need something to do.

All in all—barring certain issues involved with hanging 10 pictures on 10 inappropriately spaced nails on a rough brick wall with wire—I am happy with how the display turned out. If you’re in the Chicago area, go check it out. It’s 1035 N Western Ave, just south of Division St.

We walked in on the Painted Saints‘ set a bit late, but still got a good sampling of their work and were impressed. Since I’ve been listening to Beirut a lot lately, I immediately associated the two. Afischer probably hit on a closer comparison with Andrew Bird–especially with the (well-executed) whistling. Overall, their sound is deep and rhythmic, with an old-timey western feel–instantly enjoyable, though not entirely unique. The album advertises eight members/contributers, but the show was well managed by just two members of the band through the use of looping and a juggling act of instruments that included the standing bass, clarinet, guitar, whistling, accordion, and more. On top of their impressive musical skills, we also discovered that one of the band members also does all of their album art (left). We might have scored an interview with these guys, and we’ll keep you updated.

The second band was Radiant Darling–a similar but more upbeat sound with female vocals that came off as a bit whiney. The best way I can think of to describe their music is that it’s not something I would choose to turn off, but it’s not really something you need to pay attention to either.

The headlining band seemed to have had a good balance of the qualities of the first two. The Thin Man is energetic with catchy beats, storytime quality lyrics, a great buffet of instruments, and a song about an undertaker. The band was founded by Kennedy Greenrod, whose original vision of “a one-man-band-on-a-bicycle careening down the Magnificent Mile playing Magnificent Music for the Magnificent met with grave technical difficulties and was scrapped” [bio]. Instead he rounded up some of Chicago’s best musicians, put out an album in 2001, then toured in sold out shows with names such as Andrew Bird’s Bowl of Fire. Throughout their three albums since, the band’s ensemble has remained relatively dynamic, which actually serves to give each album a sound distinct from those previous. Presently, they may be classifed as another of the bands riding the wave of folk-revival, but seeing that they’ve been around for a good six years, they might be more appropriately considered one the engineers of the same wave, and at the least, one of its earliest passengers.

Can you give us some basic background? Where did you go to school? Are you “classically trained” in art? Where are you from? Was art your first calling? When did you decide that art was what you wanted to do?

I was born in Vancouver, B.C. to parents, I recently found out, that were living on a salmon fishing boat until the last month of my mother’s pregnancy. I grew up in suburban New York and I went to college at the University of Montana in Missoula. I wouldn’t say I got a “classical” training there, though. It was a pretty crappy school but I loved living in Missoula and I earned a BFA in painting there, for what it’s worth.

When I was a little kid I wanted to grow up to be either an artist or a “naturalist” (a word I learned from my grandma that I think is pretty much an antiquated way of saying “wildlife biologist”). So yes, I guess art was my first calling – or one of two.

Your style is very distinctive. It is simple and elegant. How did you develop into it? How did you choose your mediums over any of the hundreds of others?

Thanks! I don’t know how I developed into a style. I guess by drawing all the time, constantly assimilating images and motifs and other ways of drawing that have been eye-catching and beautiful to me.

As for mediums, I was mostly an oil painter when I graduated from college but I never really liked to paint as much as I liked to draw. When I moved to Portland, my boyfriend Colin and I started collaborating on illustrated stories and I suddenly found myself drawing all of the time again – less and less interested in painting and more excited about illustration. I was mostly drawing in pencil then or sometimes sharpie or those cheap rollerball pens and I knew that everything I was doing looked amateurish because I hadn’t found the right medium. Then Colin typed something like “How to draw comic books” into a search engine and figured out that a lot of illustrators used actual ink with brushes and nib pens. So I went to an art supply store and bought some ink and a handful of nibs to experiment with and settled on one that I loved so much that it’s the only one I use to this day. Eventually I started working in color too – drawing with brown ink instead of black to lower the contrast and using the same limited palette of water colors that I had always used to paint with oils.

I was originally captivated by your work when I found out that you were the artist who did the cover designs for The Decemberist’s albums. Vdov.net loves the Decemberists and have been following them even from the days of Tarkio. How did you get involved with the band? How did you get involved with the other bands you have made illustrations for?

Colin sings and writes the songs for the Decemberists. We were roommates in college years before we were sweethearts and I used to make flyers for Tarkio. When I moved to Portland, the Decemberists were just playing their first shows and Colin put me right to work making flyers and website illustrations and album art.

I think the only other bands I’ve made art for have been The Vanessa Morrison Band and Weezer. Vanessa Morrison is another friend from college and I don’t know how I got involved with Weezer. They have an art director who emailed me through my website. She probably saw the Decemberists records.

You use a lot of Russian symbols, writing, and themes in your art. What lead you to that theme?

I’m just drawn to Russia – culturally, historically, symbolically and I guess sentimentally because a bunch of my great-grandparents were Russian. I love Russian literature and painting and I love the emotional association we have with it as a setting – especially siberia or rural Russia of the 19th century. It’s so bleak and difficult and sort of backwards but also really fiery and intellectual. I use a lot of cyrillic in drawings and paintings because I’m a calligraphy nerd and writing cursive cyrillic is so much fun – it’s so pretty. I don’t know that I’ve been using as much Russian imagery lately but 3 or 4 years ago Colin and I went over there and rode the trans-siberian railway from Moscow to Irkutsk and back and when I got home Russia was all I could think about for a year.

Your art also seems to be loaded with scenes and symbols that are hard to immediately place. Where do you get your inspiration? How do you choose your themes?

I like to start with kind of a loaded setting, like a prison or a racetrack or a shantytown, and let the drawing unfold from there. My inspiration comes from everywhere imaginable.

I heard that you are having a baby very soon (congratulations) and was wondering how you thought your art would affect the child and the converse… how your child will affect your art? What are your hopes/fears about it?

Ha ha. I took so long getting around to answering these questions that I had my baby in the meantime! So I can answer definitively: For a couple of weeks after Hank was born I couldn’t draw – it was just impossible to find the time to do it – but as soon as I had a spare half hour at night I started drawing again. And with more energy than I had in a really long time. I’m afraid making art had become sort of rote – it was like my grind – but once I needed to juggle desperately to make time for it, I rediscovered how much I love it. So he’s had a great effect on my art.

I’m not sure my art has had any effect on him yet. I’ve started doing some work as a children’s book illustrator and, when I was a kid, it would have been my dream come true to be raised by an illustrator. I actually remember thinking about an illustrator that visited my elementary school, “Oh my god! I wish he was my dad!” But Hank will grow up with a musician and an illustrator and, in true kid fashion, he’ll probably spend his childhood wishing his parents were marine biologists.

It is probably hard to play favorites but… do you have an artwork or more than one that you consider your favorite.

Of the last show of watercolors I had, these were my favorites:

(see the original)

(see the original)

Was there any peice that was a lot of fun to make? One that was especially difficult?

Both of those above were fun to make. The panoramic album art for “Her Majesty the Decemberists” was difficult. It took 50 hours or something.

Finally, are you working on anything currently? Involved in any projects? Where can the curious appreciator go to see your work?

I’ve just finished illustrating a kids’ novel for Little, Brown called “The Mysterious Benedict Society”. Right now I’m working on the album art for the new Decemberists record, out in October. And Colin and I are writing and illustrating a picture book for Harper Collins, so I’ll be working on that through the fall and winter. Aside from my woefully out-of-date website you can always find new work at Motel, the gallery that represents me in Portland. Here’s the link to my page on their website.

Every time I see the Horrible Sickness I leave with a new perspective on the world. Whether it be the universal weakness in robots (sensitive testicles), NASA management (it’s true that we do looove juice boxes and I’d say about 40% of employees don’t know what their job title means, myself included), or how to get a rocket out of your head (very dangerous, life threatening operation, must have a doctor on the phone to lead you though it), these guys can explain it. So, without further ado, I present an interview with The Horrible Sickness.

The Interview:

1. First off, can you give us a brief background on The Horrible Sickness? E.g. its origins, adolescence, and/or aspirations for the future?

1. The Horrible Sickness, as best we can gather, was born in the summer of last year. It was late at night, there were no birth records, the umbilical chord was not saved in a jar. At nine members, it was an unusually large, good natured infant that enjoyed simply making people laugh. However, as it grew in renoun, it shrank in size to just five members obsessed with self promotion and monetary gain. Now as a teenager, it is less like an adult, and more like a enormous powerful child… who is hungry. When it eats, it is restless so it runs around and ’round in circles and then is tired. In the future, The Horrible Sickness hopes to one day be paid for its talents, even the smallest sum, anything to justify its own existence. And maybe to settle down with the right one.

2. Who is in the group? Do you like them?

2. Joe Chandler, Jared Crain, Daniel Campagna, Adam Sauter, and Soren Bowie make up The Horrible Sickness. Yes, they are all smart people who love their own jokes. In fact, they strive to someday produce comedy no one thinks is funny, because that would prove them misunderstood and before their time. They get along well and all like each other almost as much as themselves.

3. What were some of your favorite shows, and why? Any special moments you’d like to share?

3. Ok, so this one time Joe goes out on stage and he’s all, “Hum-de-dum, I’m eating cereal.” And then Jared jumps out and he starts going, “I’m a crazy kid hopped up on Fruity Pebbles!” except without saying it, he just made it obvious . So Joe’s all, “What are you doing?” and Jared just keeps right on jumping around like an eight year old, no, like a six year old, one that has ADD. I forget what happened next, but then he started counting his hairs. F*ck that was funny.

4. Do you have any interest in taking the show beyond improv? In other words, does improv define the Sickness or might it spread? (be specific…)

4. The Horrible Sickness hopes to start doing sketch comedy considering everyone in the group has a sketch background. In fact, improv was really a poor jumping off point because most of the members are enormously more talented at other things. With the exception of Adam, the rest of the members sit just north of the mediocre boundary. Also, the group has recently started getting down about the lack of perks in the comedy scene, they’ve sort of decided it might be more fun to become rock stars. There are still a lot of insecurity issues that need to be hammered out and a fear of non-coolness but rockstardom is sort of the light they’re shooting for.

5. Can you give us any behind-the-scenes info on the Sickness et al.? Drama? Gossip? Romance? Improper use of chopsticks?

5. Yes. It turns out that everyone in the group has directly or indirectly hooked up with girls because of the shows. Two of the members have girlfriends but we’re counting those as improv-related hookups. Rarely does the group fight amongst itself, and the fights usually have less to do with creative differences and more to do with Adam showing up drunk to the show.

6. Do any of you have professional lives outside of the Sickness?

6. Some of the members write for sketch comedy groups or are members of sketch comedy groups. Dan, Jared, and Adam fancy themselves actors, however, none of them have achieved the same international, and deserved renound as Soren. He is considered the “pretty” one of the group, prooving that talent is always a distant second to looks on the road to success in any field.

7. If given the prompt “cheese,” describe in some detail how you might respond.

7. Can we have another suggestion?

8. Where and when do you perform? Do you have material available via the internet and/or do you plan to?

8. Dan, I’m giving this one to you.

Okay, Dan here. We perform Saturday nights at 9:30 PM at the Westside Eclectic Theater. That is located at 1323-A 3rd. Street Promenade, Santa Monica, CA. In case our performance dates ever change, check out thehorriblesickness.com for an up to date schedule. The only material we have available on the internet is at the aforementioned site. And it really just consists of bunnies whose heads explode, butterflies being vaporized, and Da Vinci’s ‘Man’ being injected with a green liquid. All those things are pretty funny. There’s also a secret “balls” page on the site that always makes me laugh. Once we have some sketches filmed they will be up on our site as well. That’s all the information I have, so I’m going to give this interview back to The Horrible Sickness.

9. If I live in Connecticut, how can I support the Sickness and what do I get for it?

9. Shit, I really wore myself out on the first questions. I don’t really want to answer the rest of these.

I’ll do it (Dan again). If you live in Connecticut you can send us money. We are absolutely not a non-profit so you don’t get any kind of tax write off. In fact you don’t get anything out of it. The only thing that happens is that we get money. I’d like to say that you’ll get a warm feeling from supporting a talented troupe that is trapped in the throws of poverty, but you won’t. The other thing you can do is visit our Website every single day, even when nothing new is happening. Then recommend us to anyone you know who would want to sponsor us: Budweiser, Kaiser Permanente, the makers of Immodium AD, etc. I’m seriously done this time and permanently handing the interview back to The Horrible Sickness.

10. Is there a cure?

10. No. Oh thank god that’s it.

EOF

These guys are pretty awesome. And I know they really enjoyed doing this interview despite answers that suggest otherwise… You should check them out, and especially go and see them if you’re in the LA area. I’ll keep you updated if (when!) they start putting some material online.

Creative Commons was started by Stanford professor Lawrence Lessig in response to the influx of open source programming and the copyright problems that followed. The company has since evolved into providing copyright services not only for programming, but also for media. This media includes music, movies, photography, etc. The copyright services are free and easy to use, have been upheld in court and provide varying levels of security that you choose for your work.

The varying levels of security to choose from opens the floodgates of creativity while upholding the personalized demands of the original creator. These levels of security include any combination of the following:

By: – The new author of the changed work must give credit to the creator of the original work.
Non-Commercial – The new author cannot use the changed work for commercial purposes.
No Derivatives – The user cannot change the work, but may redistribute it.
Share Alike – The new author can use the new work as long as they use the same copyright terms as was originally put on the object.

Using these four copyright options people can personalize their copyrights to best benefit them and the community as a whole. These types of copyright options encourage the use of open source in all contexts, not just programming.

The organization is doing some really cool things with this new open source data. Under their Creative Commons Mixter website there is a contest sponsored by Warner Brothers Records to remix an existing song that is under a “cc” copyright. The winner of this contest receives a record contract from Warner Brothers. Another interesting tidbit: artists such as Boards of Canada and DJ Danger Mouse and Jemini, have uploaded their songs to be remixed or mashed by anyone who wants to.

The organization has been growing exponentially since its inception and is now providing flexible copyright laws in over 20 countries. The company has also recently started providing copyrights for scientific research under their Science Commons website.The growing need for these innovative copyright licenses ensure the protection of artists and the flexibility for creative minds to improve on others work.

Oh, PS I’m going to Brown for graduate school (thanks to Mr. acosta for this decision).

I first ran into—and was immediately attracted by—the work of Bughouse in local shops around Eagle Rock, CA while studying at Occidental. I remained interested, and followed their work through the internet until finally requesting an interview with them this February, which they kindly accepted and is printed below. The weekend following the interview, I attended Create : Fixate in downtown Los Angeles where their work was on exhibit. I took some pictures and dispersed these throughout the interview. After learning their philosophies toward art and its role in life, and seeing their very impressive show downtown, I am even more a fan.

In speaking with them recently, I’ve learned that another showing of Create : Fixate is in the works, though a date is not yet set. I will keep you informed—it is well worth attending.

Interview with Jeff and Rebecca Bughouse, February 7th, 2006:

What were the beginnings of Bughouse and where did the motivation for such a large project come from? Was it always a joint venture, or did either of you start it separately from the other?

We started the business together. We’ve been together for over 10 years, and we’d both been working in the entertainment industry. About 5 years ago, we realized that we wanted to combine illustrations with commercial art and make it readily available to the people. This all morphed into our company, Bughouse, which is British slang for a crazy house or sanitarium.

We learned screenprinting on our own, and we wanted to expand on the existing artbase, explore new mediums, add twists, be creative. We started together, and work together, but we have also pushed in different directions.

What are your roles in the company? Do you and Jeff do the same types of tasks, or do you have separate niches that you both sink into?

We usually start ideas separately; often we will work with them together, and input into each other’s work, trading back and forth. The art subsumes the individual. Jointly, however, our message is pretty clear: present something that hasn’t been seen before that also has a sense of irony and humor.

In terms of the differences between our work, we have similar motivations (heavily based in humor), but we mostly work individually. Both of us have a lot of diversity within our work, we have no one distinct style collectively or individually-commercially a distinct style will work against you, so we’ve avoided it by occupation. We work with different styles and mediums, experiment with new technologies. We really try to bring something new to the public through being creative with our art.

Where did your interests in making art originate? How did they evolve to the medium of printing?

Jeff: I was really drawn to printing because I never wanted art to be precious. I believe it should be affordable and available. These ideas have been seen historically in alternative art and are now more mainstream, which is likely a response to commercial products. I have always loved commercial art. Many people don’t see real art in commercial products, there’s always been a sort of rift between those in fine art and commercial art, but this gap is closing more now. I grew up with it: from comics, can labels, board games, television. I may not have known it then, but I was mesmerized by it.
I also love the idea that with commercial printing, we could produce 100-200 prints and sell for $50 and get it into people’s hands.

Rebecca: I guess I was first interested in art at a young age, drawing. But, art was not encouraged as an occupation. Art was just something you just did as a kid; it was considered a hobby, not something you do for work, and definitely not something you do for money. So I guess for me it was suppressed.
Then I met Jeff, and he opened it up for me again-bam! I had all these ideas. Eventually, I realized I had a real skill.

When we first got together, Jeff and I went to art classes. Neither of us had gone to formal art school, and the classes were interesting, but we realized we had our own styles to develop. The traditional art also wasn’t for us: you sell one oil painting for $1000 or more and then what? What does that do for you? Not to say that we don’t like playing with paint or other mediums, but we’d rather have our work accessible and available to anyone who is interested.

How do you start ideas?

Rebecca: I usually start out with pencil and paper, whether I’m dealing with a flat or dimensional piece. I also like to incorporate traditional medium in prints; I’ll splatter on paper, scan it in and and use it for a print, or else sometimes I’ll create the piece 100% on the computer. This is probably more in my case than Jeff’s.

Jeff: I think it was more of a generational thing for me, I didn’t really think about it. Growing up, I watched television, read comic books, paid attention to comedians, and art. [These interests transformed into] the sensibility that humor and strangeness compelled me to do something that was different. If I had to point to one source, it would be television. It may sound low-brow and pathetic, but TV is entirely commercial, and it was much better earlier on, which made it easier to filter through the junk. TV is captivating, and I’ve learned a lot from it.

I also almost see our art as reflecting what you might see in music sampling: reconfigure, sample, redo. We are able to mold fantasy and reality by experimenting with technology. In this way we create original art, which is not easy for more traditional artists because they are forced to filter the history of what came before them. Our type of work almost breaks down the boundaries between art and commercialism, hopefully producing something substantial and not crass. I truly believe that the artists’ new paintbrush is technology.

On your website, you list that you do several types of printing. For our readers, what are the differences between heat transfer, screenprints, “one of a kind,” and giclees?

All of our work originates organically, whether it be through inking, or painting, and then it is scanned to output as, say, a giclee.

A screen for screenprinting is produced from a scan of our artwork or output from computer-generated artwork. You output a clear acetate with black line art, and burn it onto screen. It becomes a stencil, and by pushing ink/paint through the stencil with a squeegee onto different mediums (canvas, wood, glass), you create a print. It is actually the same technology as t-shirt printing (or silkscreening).

With a heat transfer, the final image is digitally printed onto substrate that can be heat transferred onto a medium. We have a commercial heat press that can get up to 400 degrees, so that we can fuse paper onto different materials, or photographic imagery onto canvas.

A giclee is an archival print. It is almost a regular print from a printer, but the inks are archival, and the paper is archival, so that it is considered a fine art print, and is sometimes called an iris print.

Our one of a kind section refers to our oil or acrylic paintings, or any type of sculpture or dimensional display. It also refers to our more experimental work, such as combo heat transfers, or screen printing onto raisin boxes—we are also testing the audience for interest. We are interested in selling work, and not working in a vacuum, which stems from our commercial drive. Some artists will work alone in studio, they don’t sell their work and they don’t communicate. We want people to be interested in what we’re doing.

Your work is distinct and unique. I’ve noticed that much of it revolves around making a statement; whether it be drawn from politics, commercialization and the environment, or your community. Where do you find your inspiration and how have your experiences affected your art?

Well, we were both born and raised in LA: Rebecca in the Santa Monica surf culture, and me in Burbank–a valley boy. We had different childhoods, but we are both Angelenos. Many people see the Los Angeles culture in our art, and it’s true, it’s unavoidable.

Jeff: I’ll refer back to television, again. But today in general, there is a huge resource base for ideas, that are constantly coming at you, whether it be from the newspaper, current events, billboards, television.

It is also true that you can go for a long time, not necessarily being creative. You can sit down and contemplate, but the best ideas come in neutral state, like driving, or walking the dog, etc. Then you go to the drawing table. Like an architect, you have the idea and you’re ready to sit down and work it out.

Rebecca: I think an interesting family situation, whether good or bad, builds a sense of humor, and can inspire you in different ways.

Nature has always been an inspiration for me; the shape, and texture…weird bugs, animals, plants…there is an endless supply of variety in mother nature.

Also, the modern world is full of information. It is important to take the time to create this reaction to the world, or recreate it from your own perspective-be open to the world and pay attention to details. Artists see the unseen and bring it to the attention to those who may not have noticed it before. Then you might get the reaction “oh that’s right. Huh, that is interesting…”

I think it’s important to be open to good and bad emotions, embrace you neurosis, or to be angry to drive a political piece of art, or to be exasperated by a situation, and to want to do something-make a change. This is your voice. (But the crazy family also helps.)

Printing is a fairly modern artistic medium, how has the changing technology affected your artwork over its years of development?

Because we also have a graphic design company, we have a predilection toward graphic design in art. We started in graphic design, and as a result, we learned computers at the genesis of this business. We were able to explore illustration to its limits, which is not what it was 10 years ago because of computers–technology is at the forefront of how to produce work. In fact our work is influenced as much by graphic design as much as fine art.

We embrace technology and take every opportunity to experiment with it. Our latest technological endeavor has been exploring laser cutting. A friend of ours recently bought a laser cutter, and we’ll bring him ideas and jump in with “try cutting this,” and he’ll try it and we’ll see how it works. We can cut pieces out of wood or plastic, or etch out of glass or mirror. We’ve been experimenting with it a lot and are now moving into more of a product realm. We’re also talking about laser cutting machine that can be used for 3-dimensional work.

Technology is incredibly important because it opens up new realms for artists. This machine is affordable enough for a friend of ours to buy, have it at their disposal.

We have a sort of advantage over other artists, with our background in graphic design. We are less afraid of technology, and our knowledge has enabled us to build our website and manage the site and sales there.

Overall, artists shouldn’t be afraid of technology, and instead jump on the opportunity for new work and to see something different come out of it.

Another significant result of technology in the last couple decades is the internet. What role has the internet played in building your business and promoting your work?

The internet helps on many levels. It is a fabulous resource for research, finding imagery, and materials. It has also enabled us to have a commerce website and a great email list-people do purchase from website and it’s helped us quite a bit.

The intenet also provides a great resource for connectivity between artists. You can very easily get a basic sense of who’s doing what and when, and that’s brilliant. On the flip-side, it could hurt some artists because these days everyone is expected to have their own website.
It also wouldn’t be possible for us to work from home without the internet. This locale is really convenient both for Bughouse and our graphic design business. So we really appreciate it.

You have an event coming up this weekend in Downtown LA. When did you first get involved with Create: Fixate and do you have anything to add about the event?

Create : Fixate is an event that comes around every two months in LA. It is always a group show, with several DJs, vendors (fashion, eyeglass, jewelry, or other merchandise); sometimes its only photography, sometimes its all mediums.

It is on a floor in building downtown that hasn’t been renovated; it is pretty much a guerilla event. We set up and tear down in the span of a week. We used to have to install our own lighting, even.

Through a quick internet search, I’ve also discovered that your work, specifically your twist on the McDonalds’ M: “I’m Lovin’ It” logo to read W:”I’m Bombin’ It,” is part of a traveling exhibit called Yo! What Happened to Peace? How did you become involved in this project and when exactly did the exhibit start meandering around the world?

I believe we started in that event about two years ago? John Carr is the curator, and he invited us to be involved. The first show was Tokyo, and was a limited number of prints (20-25). Since then, it’s been traveling around the world, from DC to New York to San Francisco, Chicago..,and also to Italy, Scandinavia, and back to Japan. It has also grown with time; now, I believe it includes over 100 prints. I have one print in the show and Jeff has two.

It was inspired mostly by Bush Administration policies, and is ongoing…so is the war so I guess it fits. We actually don’t do a lot of political art. Mostly when people ask for it, we are motivated by an assignment. We aren’t naturally drawn to do it.

The McDubya in the exhibit has also been included in the book Design of Dissent, and also in the traveling exhibit whose curator is Josh McPhee: Paper Politics.

Have you been to many of the Yo! exhibits? Do you have an impression of how the event has been received in different cities around the world?

We wanted to go to the second Tokyo run, but we ran into scheduling problems and weren’t able to make it.

Our impression has been that American artists that participate in the show are more Bush-centered. The submissions from other parts of the world focus more on militarism, or peace. The Japanese were definitely focused more on peace. I don’t think culturally they are willing to speak out as much as Americans.

We aren’t sure how the Tokyo crowd related to the show. I believe they were bemused. It may be too upfront. But we can’t really say about the other cities the show has traveled to: European cities probably received it pretty well.

Josh and John at forefront of this endeavor. It is fun to be part of this community, and it’s great that it’s just being done. It is vocal expression that brings people together. It is angry and positive and allows the voice to be heard. Dissention is the hallmark of America, and this is a great way to display it.

Another motivation for the show was to showcase the medium for the masses: printing.

Have you receive much attention as a result? Positive/negative?

Well, we got into other shows because of it. It opens doors for shows in the same genre, and then there is the book, Design of Dissent. We haven’t gotten much negative attention, weird emails occasionally, but you’re going to get those regardless. The show hasn’t caused any major problems (that we’re aware of).

Are there other exhibits you’re involved in that we should know about? Anything exciting coming up?

Paper Politics started in Seattle and is in Brooklyn now. They want to keep it going, but are not sure where it will go next, possibly Portland, OR, Washington DC, Philadelphia, and/or Los Angeles.

Are there any artists that have had a particularly strong role in inspiring your work? Any recommendations you’d like to add?

Francis Bacon, Ralph Steadman, any and all comic book artists, Gary Baseman, Damien Hirst, Tibor Kalman, Sagmeister, Jeff Soto, Mark Ryden, Odd Nerdrum and Mother Nature.

I highly encourage you to explore the work of Bughouse and keep an eye on them in the future. Oh, and buy their prints—I have Los Angeles and never get tired of staring at it. Perfectly encompasses my perspective on the city.

A brewing project is the LA Metro and its passengers. No normal people ride Los Angeles public transportation, so this should prove to be an interesting survey. Stay tuned…