Freerange, can I respectfully suggest that the word troll/trolling is being overused.
In my mind a troll is someone who is being intentionally aggressive, unpleasant, vile, discriminatory etc.
I now see it used to describe someone with a different opinion. Or someone calling out a flip (for years anyone flipping a print could expect some criticism here).
Can I humbly suggest that we all try to use the term a little less loosely, and reserve it for genuine trolls?

Not surprised

All great points @nuartfestival but I think in Sandra's case from what I have read in these numerous threads about her and looking at her work that her use of the imagery is nowhere near conceptual or has a deep meaning like some of the points you reference, An artist consciously appropriating/sampling or using the actual idea of post-modernism, pop art and so forth does so with knowledge and respect for those movements. I dont see a clearly thought out concept as most street artists, pop artists and so forth have when apprpriating imagery. I know the Cages explanation but it doesnt hit on the radar as much as those artists who actually appropriate/sample with the knowledge of what they are doing. I see sandra as a young painter working things out in her work accidenteally coming across the images and using them, then now they are blowing up and there is a need to track back and build a relevant story as her work demands more value. Im ok with it being purely for aesthetics many artists I appreciate paint for the image not the concept, but they are honest with what they do and their intentions. Sandra seems to have people defend her based on the umbrella pop art/appropriation as if she really had some deep meaning, maybe her work just is good paintings. All work doesnt have to change the world but those hyping her like hers does is a valid reason for discussion. And yes she shouldnt be mentioned in Urban art/street art anything near that she is a new contemporary, meaning a low brow soon to be contemporary artist in my opinion. And I say new contemporary because its an umbrella term being sold as the next big thing but has no real conceptual meaning behind it. 

Hey Fake - I absolutely agree, there really should be a bit more appreciation for the other artists involved here.

Ive followed Handiedan for a long-time now and would love to own one of her original collage works. I have a couple of nice prints in the collection and I love the vintage era they represent but they just don't capture the intricacy and number of layers in her collages which are, in reality, taken directly from vintage work previously produced.
She does construct some beautiful, sexual imagery in a very unique style. the selection and positioning of the different pieces of her collage are so carefully thought through and constructed throughout the layers, and when you look closely there are drawings, paintings and all sorts that draw the piece together as a whole and make it a Handiedan (not a 1930's jazz mag ).

 (going to check out Mimi now )

"Im ok with it being purely for aesthetics many artists I appreciate paint for the image not the concept, but they are honest with what they do and their intentions. Sandra seems to have people defend her based on the umbrella pop art/appropriation as if she really had some deep meaning, maybe her work just is good paintings."


She can ascribe whatever ideas she wants to her art, and I can buy them for different reasons. I own two pieces and I am on the look out for a third or fourth because those comics when I was a kid were meaningful to me. Another artist could have appropriated them and put them in their art, but that doesnt mean I would have been attracted to the art as much or at all. Blatantly, i will say the aesthetic is incredibly appealing to me and I appreciate it for matching incredible eyes and women with comics of my youth that were tragic or enduring story arcs (for me). i suspect others may feel the same, but would be less willing to admit it because it lacks "depth" but whatever. 

such a wonderful discussion about art itself. it is great when people are trying to analyze if the art is the real thing or is just a product of solid marketing strategies by interested parties.

This show looks promising. Always appreciated Handiedan's work and would like to see an original up close.

can we change FR title from Forum Guardian to Sandra's Guardian

How does that account for the vast majority of her sales being to women ?

And therefore what?  Your point about her art?


As an aside, I don't own pieces by her that bring out lust or love in me so you throwing that in there is a touch weird. 

Are they? Like, really, really? I'm so surprised.

Nothing wrong with that. I just genuinely thought it would have been the other way. You'd know more than me though. Interesting.

When involved in art criticism (good or bad) best to not think from a personal point of view - comics and pictures of hot women are an adolescent right of passage, a lustful period for most. I would imagine many of the people on this site have managed to keep the child in them alive. Thus there is a subliminal reaction as the work pushes passionate and familiar buttons.

I don't think much about her art, initially paid attention couple years ago here some of her stuff cheap she's been prolific and prices have gone up and JLG certainly a step forward not all his artists have moved up but it is a good place to land. If I would have bought an early piece it would have been because I dug the comic or its use, which would have meant from a kitsch angle but I really don't dig any of the artists on this site that use anonymous attractive women (usually white) as their starting point. But regarding her "art" too early in her career for a proper critique.

"When involved in art criticism (good or bad) best to not think from a personal point of view"

oh man.

Thanks of your reply but it started from position that can't be defended. Best not to think from a personal view?  What mechanism do you use to not see something in art from a non-personal view?

You use other peoples PoV?

Critical thinking is never from a personal point of view, that's the first thing they teach you.

That could be representative, like the thought that many women will vote for Hillary.

But I've never seen a vast majority of women at any of the urban art street art events openings lines for a print anywhere. I'd need some stats on her sales to believe that.