ohhhh man,.. gonna chime in on this.

While he starts with well know imagery,..His work is clearly transformative. I would parallel Warhol. If you look at his work and think it's just a "copy" of a care bear, . . . you're crackers. Combining the Wu-Tang Clan Symbol , . . an iconic hiphop logo with a care bear, . . is both hilarious and brilliant.

From the technical perspective, his is clearly very talented. Great use of colour, space, and scale. Just because something is "easy" or "quick" to produce does not diminish the artist value. . . i.e.: Picasso Dove, . . .basically all works by Keith Harring, etc.

As a huge Wu-Tang fan, I was waiting for the drop since I've seen the mural in NY. From my point of view the size of the print is too big, I'd never put such an image this size in my living room. If it was a smaller size with a more reasonable price this would habe been a no brainer. Giclee or not.

I actually quite like the print, brown variant in particular. He seems to be really big in the states, they seem to have the same affinity for him that we did (in the UK) for Stik. Sometimes, I think you've just got to see it on a wall to get it.

Nah, he ain't big in the states. Stop blaming us. He had cheap prints of cartoon images through some little Brooklyn gallery that closed. He's a modern day sign painter.

Now Katie Merz, currently painting a huge mural on Flatbush near Schemerhorn, that's impressive. Not far from the KAWS and McGee street pieces.

minutiae

I actually liked these, passed as giclee and some were very expensive.

The actual merits will be determined by each viewer, but here's an extract of an exchange I had with Jerkface last year, during which his work was discussed:


If you were on a plane having a nice chat with a fellow passenger, how would you respond if during the conversation they asked, “What kind of art do you do exactly?”

Well, first, I’d say I paint cartoon characters. And if I had to describe the style without being able to show them… I’d explain that facial features are sometimes removed, so the viewer isn’t focused on that aspect and instead pays more attention to the composition. And there’s the multiplication of the characters, which creates a sense of motion.

There’s another thing about the work, which I only realised at a later stage. Many artists seem to struggle with the background for their pieces. It’s like, “Okay, I have a focal point. What am I going to put around it?” They don’t start off by looking at the overall composition.

What is special about my paintings is that there’s never such a dilemma. The foreground and background are made interchangeable.

That’s right, because they’re basically the same subjects.

In hindsight, it’s an obvious solution. And I think that is the strongest concept for the work. The idea feels fresh and it’s very effective. Everything else is a result of that—like the hyper-focus and the figures being magnified, seeming bigger than they are.

Why use cartoon characters to begin with?

Painting them reminds me of my childhood. And remembering your childhood—remembering cartoons especially—takes you back, not only to an innocent time but also a time of no responsibility. You know, hanging out, getting to watch TV, with nothing to worry about. Just a great feeling of youth. Good positive memories.

And I’m having so much fun with it. I also believe anything that makes somebody smile has a healing benefit. So there’s a lot of satisfaction for me there as well.

It’s a very happy subject matter, isn’t it? You could call it escapist.

At this point I’ve received every type of criticism around. One is that my work is very poppy, that I’m avoiding “the real things in life”. But why would I want to dwell on the negative? Look at a newspaper. Probably the only cheerful thing in there is the comics section. I prefer focusing on the positive. And I’d certainly rather project that into this world.

Do you have any of your own characters?

I do have a few of my own, but I’m not using them right now. It just seems like a different direction. And I’m very content with the one I’m already headed in.

Here’s an example to help explain: If I want to communicate with somebody, I’m going to use the language that we both understand, right?

Right…

So in a sense I have the whole world’s language of cartoons to play with. I have an endless source of imagery I can twist to create a new slang of that language. Being able to utilise everything from the past and present, it’s unlimited.

But at the same time, in all creative fields—fine art, design, music or whatever—there’s a real premium placed on originality. Are you hitting any resistance due to the source imagery, the fact your paintings are based on famous cartoon figures?

Yeah, that’s unquestionably my weak spot. And I kind of appreciate having that weak spot…

Why’s that?

As long as I’m doing this, the criticism will be there. Someone will always say, “You’re just ripping off other people.” So, I like the fact it keeps me grounded. There’s a percentage of hackiness in the work, it’s undeniable. But I don’t really have a problem about that, especially with the positivity I get from people.

Everything else is solid. The technical skills are present, they’re refined. There’s the whole concept of the repeating imagery. And the compositions created—I never put out a weak one. Nobody can knock me for any of that.

And are you comfortable that your work is sufficiently your own?

Obviously, it’s not the characters that are original, because I didn’t create them. It’s what I’m doing with them. That’s the distinction, where the originality comes in.

It’s very interesting as well though to simply use what already exists and rework it. Like, how do you create a recognisable style when none of the imagery is yours?

And how do you?

I don’t know how it happens. But it’s clear that there is uniqueness. If I do a painting of Mickey Mouse, someone will see it and say, “Oh, that’s a Jerkface piece.” The fact my work is recognisable says it all.

It’s proof that something is there besides just the character.

Right. The defence can rest.

Good read, interesting how describing his work ended up on his terms being a defense of it.

met - fantastic share, thank you so much.

To be honest, Jerkface's seemingly humble responses ("that’s unquestionably my weak spot"), self perspective ("how do you create a recognizable style when none of the imagery is yours?") and positivity ("Just a great feeling of youth. Good positive memories") in his work are endearing to me.

I was not initially a fan of Jerkface when I started collecting, but after seeing some of his street pieces in NYC and also recognizing how much my kids love him, I purchased my first piece - a Snoopy w/Woodstock AP. The quality is excellent, the composition looks great on the wall and the colors are bright (and as a Buff Monster fan, I'm a fan of bright colors )

This release doesn't speak to me as much as a handful of others, but just adding some perspective as to why Jerkface might be appealing for some folks.

P.S. his book, Saturday Morning, is a great coffee table topper and is almost always the first one guests at my house reach for

Needs to do a Gumball

Recognizable as his? Sure, but that doesn't make it any good.

Perhaps I'll start painting murals of famous cartoon characters with nice big c**ks. I'll be top of the urban art game in no time.

[

The "good" part is subjective.

Cartoons with big cocks? Bast already did that with smurfs. Just shows how hard it is to be original!

. . . and in the end we have three pages of discussion on his work.

Yes you do. A lot of tráfico means a lot of interest.