Carol Christian Poell

[AKA*NYC]

About repulsion : his work often refers to the Aktionnismus, and the human hair tie as the fantasy of human skin could be seen as a provocation, to spark off the Rückkehr des Verdrängten, like the Aktionnisten did.

as i read deleuze's post the viennese aktionists immediately came to mind. their influence on poell has been well established and elements of his work square perfectly with the collective aktionist aesthetic as it's presented in various documents of the early performances. it's no longer possible to read about the aktionists outside of the context that their work was intended to address the silence of their countrymen in the post-war years. so yeah, interesting parallel with what deleuze writes. and on that note i was surprised i didn't see a single recognizable face at the nitsch opening in nyc last night.

[kunk75]

But what effects did the aktonists have on wolfgang puck or arnolds work? Perhaps their influencecan explain kindergarten cop? On a side not, in all seriousness, wasn't their a thread rearding the nazi aesthetics effect and influence on fashion or did I imagine that?

[thejarc]

Oh god I'm so sorry to ruin this wonderful discussion but a do have to correct a little bit.

It would be "Menschenhaut zu Leder verarbeiten"

Sorry for that. But keep on.

[AKA*NYC]

wasn't their a thread rearding the nazi aesthetics effect and influence on fashion or did I imagine that?

yes there was a very short lived thread

[Pumpfish]

I've always believed the conceptual art should be judged by the quality of the concept, not the skill in rendering. This permits some pretty slap dash construction, or oursourcing production, which we can live with once the concept is deliverd (and of value).

Taking this to clothes design which, at its best, is an applied art, does the need for functionality (and perhaps commerciality) inhibit the expressing of the concept? Or does the designer/artist relegate concept to inspiration, and then try to develop commercial / desirable clothes?

Ultimately I see CCP as a highly commercial designer. He appeals to hardcore design fans, commands premium prices, and generally makes his customers look fantastic in clothes that mean something to them.

Kunk, Sir, I hope you find the Nazi thread and can sleep easy again knowing your mind hasn't been wandering!

[Chant]

You maybe wrong. I think he was genuily fucking with you (and the rest of us). But, hey, if it leads to a discussion of Nazi uniforms, it's all good.

/

May it be a hoax or not does not really matter actually, since the complicated question of CCP's relations to his homeland's history remains, and I need for some reason to clear my views on this subject.

[Peasant]

I remember reading through it in the archvies... Still there. There isn't much depth to it, though.
I also recall some Nazi / Poell comparisons made in an older thread. I believe it was the interview he had in a German art mag. More about his obsession with them? Which I don't find odd at all. Everything Nazi related seems to be collected. Museums are sought out and frequented. It was an intense and horrific time.. and not long ago. And he's Austrian. Who would you expect him to be interested in? The Kennedy's?

Good comparison to aktonists. I never really picked up on that. Use of Ox blood, pig intestine sweater, pig purse, showroom with dripped latex (blood) all over the floor beneath his pieces. Great reading going this AM.

[spiral jetty]

I've always believed the conceptual art should be judged by the quality of the concept, not the skill in rendering. This permits some pretty slap dash construction, or oursourcing production, which we can live with once the concept is deliverd (and of value).

Taking this to clothes design which, at its best, is an applied art, does the need for functionality (and perhaps commerciality) inhibit the expressing of the concept? Or does the designer/artist relegate concept to inspiration, and then try to develop commercial / desirable clothes?

Still a concept - be it in art or fashion or cuisine - needs a medium to be displayed. A piece of art of whatever quality to be functional or commerical or in other ways heteronomously (mis-)used doesn't contradict it to be 'medium' of a concept/idea transcending its functional or commercial or whatever form.

If poell's designs allow to link it with such a, say, refind argument as spread out above with its historic, psychological, consumer cultural and even moral implications, hello, congratulations to the man. And if this is possible on the - compared to the viusual arts ghetto - far from safe commercial terrain of fashion design, than even more so.

[Faust]

/

May it be a hoax or not does not really matter actually, since the complicated question of CCP's relations to his homeland's history remains, and I need for some reason to clear my views on this subject.

Naturally

[BECOMING-INTENSE]

Deleuze 's interpretations are more of socio-cultural than strictly psychoanalytical (but I may be wrong), even though the transposition should be possible.

Telling Deleuze that he's strictly psychoanalytical
would be quite insulting.

[Chant]

Telling Deleuze that he's strictly psychoanalytical
would be quite insulting.

[deleuze]

You maybe wrong. I think he was genuily fucking with you (and the rest of us). But, hey, if it leads to a discussion of Nazi uniforms, it's all good.

Actually Faust I was being quite serious, if provoking.

With respect to Actionism I think it is a little unfair, maybe disingenuous, to suggest Poell is inspired by the Actionists. Fashion designers have throughout history culled the history of art for inspiration whether it be YSL's De Stijl dresses or Raf's Rothko knits, or more pertinently Obscur's recent Günter Brus collection. These designs are at best an homage and at worst mimicry. I wanted to propose the possibility that the impetus behind Poell's work isn't a calculated appropriation but rather a blind inspiration rooted in a particular socio-cultural context that is shared by the Actionists. What separates them is their discipline and execution so looking for any literal similarities in each other's works is quite silly. This is the difference between Poell and Obscur, one a creator of symbols, the other an archivist and collagist of symbols which although could potentially be considered art most of the time lacks subtlety and sophistication and is in effect no different than what fashion designers have continuously explored.

[Chant]

I said that he refers to, never that he was insipred by. My opinion, but BSR has another one, is that the obvious references are ironical or a sham. CCP is somewhere else.

[hallucination]

@Deleuze: Hear, hear.

[t-bone]

Godwin's law proven true yet again, page 414...