Title Homage to Paul Jaisini
List Title: Respect To Paul Jaisini From Bob Kellogg (GIG) London UK '14
Emerald Green Stylized Portrait (face with long hair that blend soft into the lighter
green (mixed color) of the face (alien green - the symbolic meaning of the color) The hair cover one eye, the other eye is closed. Black Green Hair with slightly glowing outlines on the hair extensions. Horizontal writing on the lower foreground:
Respect To Paul Jaisini From Bob Kellogg (GIG) London UK '14
paul-jaisini john-lennon neon-green image funny sunglases
On August 20 2014 at United Kingdom 8 Views
Random Thoughts on Paul Jaisini… .
Paul Jaisini is not Marcel Duchamp, Yves Klein and all others.
There is a complex way to try to explain why, but there is also a less complex way. Not Duchamp, nor Yves Klein, etc came to the REDUCTION of visual means as early in Life as Paul Jaisini who started the GREAT REDUCTION as early in life as at the tender age of 10.
Clearly at such age there could be no such thing as artificiality or true sensitivity to what is called “the environmental trauma” with such a consequence to cause a young child- artist to refuse the LANGUAGE - visual or spoken.
At the age of 10 a child doesn’t know the philosophical depths of why any language could be deceiving.And yet at the age of 10 a child such as Paul Jaisini acts out straightforward without understanding or thinking about what he/she is doing.
The age factor is what significantly or completely opposes the artists such as Duchamp, Yves Klein who had arrived to the art reduction or destruction ideas at their mature age with long art career behind it.
Therefore to me any such attempt for reduction (on any scale from minor to major) of visual means is nothing but a self-serving attempt to reinvent own art. The only “true” “reductionist” among the existing visual artists was and remains Paul Jaisini.
He made his great breakthrough (the reduction of visual language) as early as at the age of 10.
This places him on the winning pedestal of the only known artist who from the very beginning of his artistic endeavors was already oriented not to accept what is known as visual language.
If someone wonders why wouldn’t Paul as a child artist just turn away from the arts if its known visual language had no appeal to him, just don’t get involved if you don’t believe in this visual or other languages (and since a child can’t really understand these sort of things written here still the child could find other interests in life…)
Paul can’t turn away from his gift in arts I assume due to his genetic predisposition to it.
He probably had little choice with his eidetic memory, the prodigious art talent manifested almost instantly after he was born.
Herewith having “no choice” he also is not “sold” to the visual language and its limitations.By the age of 10 he arrives to his own Great Reduction knowing nothing about art history and having zero interest in art. His "new" art must had proven truer to him if he continues.
As to what he creates on surface (paper, photography, etc) he calls it "killing time" at school and doing it without any pleasure. Any "normal" child gets huge pleasure from dealing with paints, drawings and crafts. Paul on the other hand has not experienced any such pleasure while drawing/painting on paper. He did it as I already mentioned to kill time and to give his artworks away to his peers who liked what he did.
Being popular among the school kids and especially girls was his only motivation. I find it very unusual that Paul as a child felt burdened by creating an artwork, that he never liked his artworks that were and remain quite notorious for their aesthetic beauty and mature technique.
At 5 years of age he shocked his father who is an accomplished sculptor when his son had made a three dimensional composition in a drawing for kindergarten, when what is commonly expected from a child would be a stick figures drawing. Paul created a detailed realistic drawing of a human figure, animals, landscape and so on with perspective of which he knew nothing… He was not trained in any art school growing up as a “normal” kid.
I want to point to what I find to be some striking things about P. Jaisini.
1) When he is asked about his childhood or past times he describes things in such detail that to someone like me would be inconceivable.
In short he remembers absolutely everything to a minute what was happening to him ages ago and can give the exact photo-like description.
If he perhaps (I don't know anything about his present life what he once told me I do know for a fact) doesn't have the same eidetic memory in present times, nevertheless what was once processed by his eidetic memory in the past remains memorized in such particular to eidetic memory quality.
It seems to me that Paul Jaisini sincerely doesn't like most visual arts. This must be due to the way how he sees things differently from how majority of us could see, the visual artists including.
He never really cared about his artworks he produced for whatever reason ever since he started producing from early childhood.