Ah, just what we need! A Gauguin v2.0 for the 21st century art world; complete with western male savior complex, fetishization of “primitivistic” ideals, and unabashed objectification/commodification of women! He would fit right in at the MoMA, that’s for sure.
In all honesty though, ever since I saw Urban Erotic at Jack Hanley Gallery last week I’ve been struggling to answer many questions raised by the phenomenon that is Alphachanneling, along with droves of other androcentric artists that are similarly celebrated in a seemingly baseless manner today. In the end I’m still left scratching my head, but have generated some theories for possible explanation of his popularity and success in the general art world. I should preface this however with a personal acknowledgement of the following discourse as misanthropic albeit factual, and would like to contextualize my hypothetically-perceived vitriol as a self-aware tactic — it’s no secret that people have serious complaints about art and the ‘world’ in which it exists, but exploring and identifying an issue of injustice is the first step to suggesting solutions and reform, and my aim above all is to do simply that. (I don’t actually hate this guy, I’m just trying to make a point or something).
Alphachanneling is a Swiss-born, Oakland California-based artist whose lush, watercolor depictions of erotic scenes were reportedly first recognized via Instagram, with an enthusiastic base of followers that is continually expanding. Apropos to the spirit of artists who present work on digital platforms, there is an alluring anonymity and esoteric quality of artists discovered through Instagram, and Alphachanneling is no exception. Frequently assumed to be female, most viewers are surprised to learn that the artist is in fact a man, and his legal name is still unknown to the public.
In an excerpt from Jack Hanley Gallery’s press release for Urban Erotic — Alphachanneling’s first ever solo exhibition — the show’s title is reportedly derived from a fictitious world created by the artist, where “women are exalted and sexual acts are supreme,” and “the conversation of sexuality as an expression of the higher self flourishes…believing that sexuality is the most wholesome prayer to life and thus the artist’s delicate watercolors and drawings strive to be a celebration of all life’s glorious and fantastic pleasures.” These sentiments are communicated through the work, and the face-value appeal of his aesthetic is fairly straightforward. His drawings are pretty! He certainly has an eye for harmonious colors, intricate patterns, and image composition — the latter which is influenced by sensibilities in eastern art and often times evocative of complementary yin and yang components within the frame, a compositional style that satisfies and welcomes the viewer.
I’m personally a fan of his monochrome garden scene triptych (the only works in the whole show that are absent of human figures), and his washy, less line-driven watercolor charts of figures and couples represented in various multiples and configurations.
It is apparent through the simplified, stylized manner in which Alphachanneling depicts bodies that he is someone who has closely studied anatomy and is very familiar with the human form — a quality that is particularly evident in its absence, especially when one attempts to render forms with such bold lines and simple gestures as he does.
That said, basically everything else about Alphachanneling’s work beyond it’s formalistic niceness is kind of problematic. First of all, I couldn’t not notice the fact that this is his first exhibition is painfully apparent in the installation of the work — in several of the frames (which were definitely purchased in packs of multiples at Ikea) the works on watercolor paper weren’t even centered properly, leaving some internal edges of the matboards exposed. Once my inner-fusty-institutional-artist-self was able to see past the presentation faux pas, I then noticed the overwhelmingly consistent theme of white, heterosexual, male-centric subject matter in almost every single depicted scene.
Furthermore, the only people of color present in the work are either shown servicing the male (as seen in the above androcentric jungle orgy, featuring one vaguely brown and/or just tan woman as one of the three different hands simultaneously tending to the man’s genitalia) or simply showcased (i.e. othered!) on their own within the frame, not really doing anything except passively existing in a sexualized, objectified manner seemingly arranged for the viewers’ own pleasurable consumption.
InTiger Girls Just Hanging Out Waiting for Some Trouble (above), topless, large-breasted girls of varying skin tones are draped languorously from a tree wearing nothing but animal print loincloths (because, obviously, that’s where all women of color come from: the exotic jungle). In Untitled (below), three leggy women whose skin was literally colored with a black colored pencil sport ‘ethnic’ beaded headdresses, cheetah skin shirts, and absolutely nothing from the waist down except for high heels, idling in some tropical, African-esque landscape.
Now the androcentric, racially screwy sexualization of women is bad enough (it’s hard to imagine a more commonplace philosophical vantage represented in art and society, like what else is new), but what I find particularly vexing is the discrepancy between what the work actually is, and the vastly different manner in which Alphachanneling is spoken about and depicted through reviews, interviews, and other written content. In an article written about him by Jerry Saltz for New York Magazine in 2014 —
(side note: is it not a bit curious that the only legitimate recognitions of Alphachanneling to be found online are all posted after this endorsement by the rather inflated persona of “art critic bad boy” that is Jerry Saltz? Huh).
— Saltz comments on a quote from the artist about his work being ‘a devotional prayer to the feminine principal,’ saying, “I knew it! The worship of female power, the female body, and pleasure. It wasn’t just a ‘perv,’ but someone obsessed with the idea of something. Someone inexplicably driven to make a visual philosophy.” Saltz goes on to defend Alphachanneling’s from anyone that might dismiss his work for its’ obvious pornographic, tropic quality: “All of Alphachanneling’s art is erotic without coming off as blatantly gratuitous bad-boy, cartoony, big-tits/big-dick sexism…[featuring] coupling in all forms, with any number of people, and mixed races.” Oh really, Jerry? Suddenly heteronormative erotica where all women are nyphomaniacally only servicing the sole male or sometimes each other if the male is present within the frame (if male is not present, women are depicted just ‘hanging out,’ doing nothing but gazing toward the viewer) constitutes interesting, innovative art that’s worthy of public endorsement?? Suddenly, bodies of work that consistently portray only one male among beautiful women, a sole male agent that’s basically the same-looking guy from scene to scene that almost definitely bares an uncanny resemblance to the artist (I conjecture wildly), suddenly this constitutes ‘not-pervy’ erotic art??? That part still fails my comprehension.
A recent review of Urban Erotic in the Huffington Post presents another amusing quote sourced from an interview with the artist: “I’m not deliberately avoiding a male-centric or masculine expression, I’m just making the things I haven’t been able to find in terms of the eroticism out there.” Oh really, Alpha-male-channeling? Well I’ll be! Didn’t know that there was a scarcity of men treating women like human blow-up dolls in erotica out there.
It really is refreshing to see traditional gender roles reinforced in depictions of sex these days, like the painting above which is from a series of a blue male spanking and variously penetrating a pink woman. Hard to find such good, socially progressive erotica this day and age.
Not that I’ve presented a particularly compelling case to do so, but if you still want to see Alphachanneling’s Urban Erotic you have one more day to do so — the last day of the show is Sunday, April 17th at Jack Hanley Gallery which is open from 11am to 6pm, and located on the second floor of 327 Broome Street, New York, NY 10002. In parting, I leave you with an anomalous scene in the exhibition which is the one singular piece I can honestly say I doenjoy,Bitch Losing Patience with Bad Kitty:
Ah, just what we need! A Gauguin v2.0 for the 21st century art world; complete with western male savior complex, fetishization of “primitivistic” ideals, and unabashed objectification/commodification of women! He would fit right in at the MoMA, that’s for sure.
In all honesty though, ever since I saw Urban Erotic at Jack Hanley Gallery last week I’ve been struggling to answer many questions raised by the phenomenon that is Alphachanneling, along with droves of other androcentric artists that are similarly celebrated in a seemingly baseless manner today. In the end I’m still left scratching my head, but have generated some theories for possible explanation of his popularity and success in the general art world. I should preface this however with a personal acknowledgement of the following discourse as misanthropic albeit factual, and would like to contextualize my hypothetically-perceived vitriol as a self-aware tactic — it’s no secret that people have serious complaints about art and the ‘world’ in which it exists, but exploring and identifying an issue of injustice is the first step to suggesting solutions and reform, and my aim above all is to do simply that. (I don’t actually hate this guy, I’m just trying to make a point or something).
Alphachanneling is a Swiss-born, Oakland California-based artist whose lush, watercolor depictions of erotic scenes were reportedly first recognized via Instagram, with an enthusiastic base of followers that is continually expanding. Apropos to the spirit of artists who present work on digital platforms, there is an alluring anonymity and esoteric quality of artists discovered through Instagram, and Alphachanneling is no exception. Frequently assumed to be female, most viewers are surprised to learn that the artist is in fact a man, and his legal name is still unknown to the public.
In an excerpt from Jack Hanley Gallery’s press release for Urban Erotic — Alphachanneling’s first ever solo exhibition — the show’s title is reportedly derived from a fictitious world created by the artist, where “women are exalted and sexual acts are supreme,” and “the conversation of sexuality as an expression of the higher self flourishes…believing that sexuality is the most wholesome prayer to life and thus the artist’s delicate watercolors and drawings strive to be a celebration of all life’s glorious and fantastic pleasures.” These sentiments are communicated through the work, and the face-value appeal of his aesthetic is fairly straightforward. His drawings are pretty! He certainly has an eye for harmonious colors, intricate patterns, and image composition — the latter which is influenced by sensibilities in eastern art and often times evocative of complementary yin and yang components within the frame, a compositional style that satisfies and welcomes the viewer.
I’m personally a fan of his monochrome garden scene triptych (the only works in the whole show that are absent of human figures), and his washy, less line-driven watercolor charts of figures and couples represented in various multiples and configurations.
It is apparent through the simplified, stylized manner in which Alphachanneling depicts bodies that he is someone who has closely studied anatomy and is very familiar with the human form — a quality that is particularly evident in its absence, especially when one attempts to render forms with such bold lines and simple gestures as he does.
That said, basically everything else about Alphachanneling’s work beyond it’s formalistic niceness is kind of problematic. First of all, I couldn’t not notice the fact that this is his first exhibition is painfully apparent in the installation of the work — in several of the frames (which were definitely purchased in packs of multiples at Ikea) the works on watercolor paper weren’t even centered properly, leaving some internal edges of the matboards exposed. Once my inner-fusty-institutional-artist-self was able to see past the presentation faux pas, I then noticed the overwhelmingly consistent theme of white, heterosexual, male-centric subject matter in almost every single depicted scene.
Furthermore, the only people of color present in the work are either shown servicing the male (as seen in the above androcentric jungle orgy, featuring one vaguely brown and/or just tan woman as one of the three different hands simultaneously tending to the man’s genitalia) or simply showcased (i.e. othered!) on their own within the frame, not really doing anything except passively existing in a sexualized, objectified manner seemingly arranged for the viewers’ own pleasurable consumption.
InTiger Girls Just Hanging Out Waiting for Some Trouble (above), topless, large-breasted girls of varying skin tones are draped languorously from a tree wearing nothing but animal print loincloths (because, obviously, that’s where all women of color come from: the exotic jungle). In Untitled (below), three leggy women whose skin was literally colored with a black colored pencil sport ‘ethnic’ beaded headdresses, cheetah skin shirts, and absolutely nothing from the waist down except for high heels, idling in some tropical, African-esque landscape.
Now the androcentric, racially screwy sexualization of women is bad enough (it’s hard to imagine a more commonplace philosophical vantage represented in art and society, like what else is new), but what I find particularly vexing is the discrepancy between what the work actually is, and the vastly different manner in which Alphachanneling is spoken about and depicted through reviews, interviews, and other written content. In an article written about him by Jerry Saltz for New York Magazine in 2014 —
(side note: is it not a bit curious that the only legitimate recognitions of Alphachanneling to be found online are all posted after this endorsement by the rather inflated persona of “art critic bad boy” that is Jerry Saltz? Huh).
— Saltz comments on a quote from the artist about his work being ‘a devotional prayer to the feminine principal,’ saying, “I knew it! The worship of female power, the female body, and pleasure. It wasn’t just a ‘perv,’ but someone obsessed with the idea of something. Someone inexplicably driven to make a visual philosophy.” Saltz goes on to defend Alphachanneling’s from anyone that might dismiss his work for its’ obvious pornographic, tropic quality: “All of Alphachanneling’s art is erotic without coming off as blatantly gratuitous bad-boy, cartoony, big-tits/big-dick sexism…[featuring] coupling in all forms, with any number of people, and mixed races.” Oh really, Jerry? Suddenly heteronormative erotica where all women are nyphomaniacally only servicing the sole male or sometimes each other if the male is present within the frame (if male is not present, women are depicted just ‘hanging out,’ doing nothing but gazing toward the viewer) constitutes interesting, innovative art that’s worthy of public endorsement?? Suddenly, bodies of work that consistently portray only one male among beautiful women, a sole male agent that’s basically the same-looking guy from scene to scene that almost definitely bares an uncanny resemblance to the artist (I conjecture wildly), suddenly this constitutes ‘not-pervy’ erotic art??? That part still fails my comprehension.
A recent review of Urban Erotic in the Huffington Post presents another amusing quote sourced from an interview with the artist: “I’m not deliberately avoiding a male-centric or masculine expression, I’m just making the things I haven’t been able to find in terms of the eroticism out there.” Oh really, Alpha-male-channeling? Well I’ll be! Didn’t know that there was a scarcity of men treating women like human blow-up dolls in erotica out there.
It really is refreshing to see traditional gender roles reinforced in depictions of sex these days, like the painting above which is from a series of a blue male spanking and variously penetrating a pink woman. Hard to find such good, socially progressive erotica this day and age.
Not that I’ve presented a particularly compelling case to do so, but if you still want to see Alphachanneling’s Urban Erotic you have one more day to do so — the last day of the show is Sunday, April 17th at Jack Hanley Gallery which is open from 11am to 6pm, and located on the second floor of 327 Broome Street, New York, NY 10002. In parting, I leave you with an anomalous scene in the exhibition which is the one singular piece I can honestly say I doenjoy,Bitch Losing Patience with Bad Kitty:
A couple months ago the editor of a journal I used to write for reached out to me requesting a review of this crappy show, so I did — she ended up not publishing it on the site though and I’m admittedly still a bit indignant about it, so screw that I’m posting it now. In addition to avenging the flesh wounds sustained by my massive poofy ego, the main reason I feel compelled to put this up is because all the other reviews of this individual that exist online represent a one-sided [flawed] view that I think is worth criticizing, which honestly furthers the thesis of my point as well so that’s pretty square. But yeah, here.
