Paul Insect Pop Up show May 2019, by Lroy on Jun 3, 2019 8:26:37 GMT 1,

May 30, 2019 8:21:59 GMT 1 hiya said:

For me 90 percent of Paul’s earlier work is rubbish (Sorry Paul but it’s purely an opinion) compared to his blocked out portraiture, all that dead rebels and clockwork nonsense is amateurish in comparison. What we’ve seen is someone who has grown up and matured elegantly. There is no one out there like him and any attempt to copy his vision will be instantly flagged accordingly. In today’s world this is an extraordinary achievement. It’s no coincidence that he’s been picked up by a known gallery.

You cannot deny that he is an extremely creative individual, and creative individuals always deliver.
I keep referring back to Damien Hirst seeing as many members on here absolutely revere him. Just how many spot paintings and prints of spots are viewed as acceptable on a creative artistic arc before it’s deemed boring, contrived and lazy? How about Josh Sperling and his marshmallow worms? An artist is more than entitled to explore their core visual language until such point as they feel satisfied it’s reached its nadir (Hirst excluded because we all know he has zero artistic talent but bucket loads of business acumen).

I am biased as I own most of Paul’s portrait prints and they’re all on the wall, problem is they’re all so big I’ve run out of space. Each to their own, plenty of artists out there to support, plenty of art out there to flip, plenty of art out there to enjoy.

One of the most interesting comment in this thread.
In fact, Paul Insect has to be considered now as a contemporary artist ( in the context of modern art - galeries, museum, cultural, intellectual and conceptual ) ?
Yes why not, I always thought that, I just « pray » - I m atheist - that it’s not another way to push some street-artists ( ex ? ) in the Kaws, Andre, etc .. new way, all of these artists where value and merchandising has increased incredibly.
Rereading your comment I don't think so ( sorry if my post is a bit confusing, I don’t write so well English ), but you can’t «  sweep » in one comment all his past, deny all his first creation, the way of an artist loving paint and creating day after day. His first artworks - still with Clockwork Britain, as enigmatic as the look/smile of Mona Lisa or Adidas/Renaissance/hip-hop/ Paintings - are punk, destroy, anti cops, rebel, provocative, etc ...
I understand that you can «  fall in love » with his last portraits, sensitive, colored, and so attractive, but don’t forget that we still can find on them the dots/grids/raster, and the different colors or style that we could find in the Target print ( have a look on it and you will find all the montage ) par example.
Remember also all these mini creativity with puppets ...
etc etc ...
If you like last Pins style that’s ok, but don’t throw the rest at the dustbin

May 30, 2019 8:21:59 GMT 1 hiya said:

For me 90 percent of Paul’s earlier work is rubbish (Sorry Paul but it’s purely an opinion) compared to his blocked out portraiture, all that dead rebels and clockwork nonsense is amateurish in comparison. What we’ve seen is someone who has grown up and matured elegantly. There is no one out there like him and any attempt to copy his vision will be instantly flagged accordingly. In today’s world this is an extraordinary achievement. It’s no coincidence that he’s been picked up by a known gallery.

You cannot deny that he is an extremely creative individual, and creative individuals always deliver.
I keep referring back to Damien Hirst seeing as many members on here absolutely revere him. Just how many spot paintings and prints of spots are viewed as acceptable on a creative artistic arc before it’s deemed boring, contrived and lazy? How about Josh Sperling and his marshmallow worms? An artist is more than entitled to explore their core visual language until such point as they feel satisfied it’s reached its nadir (Hirst excluded because we all know he has zero artistic talent but bucket loads of business acumen).

I am biased as I own most of Paul’s portrait prints and they’re all on the wall, problem is they’re all so big I’ve run out of space. Each to their own, plenty of artists out there to support, plenty of art out there to flip, plenty of art out there to enjoy.

One of the most interesting comment in this thread.
In fact, Paul Insect has to be considered now as a contemporary artist ( in the context of modern art - galeries, museum, cultural, intellectual and conceptual ) ?
Yes why not, I always thought that, I just « pray » - I m atheist - that it’s not another way to push some street-artists ( ex ? ) in the Kaws, Andre, etc .. new way, all of these artists where value and merchandising has increased incredibly.
Rereading your comment I don't think so ( sorry if my post is a bit confusing, I don’t write so well English ), but you can’t «  sweep » in one comment all his past, deny all his first creation, the way of an artist loving paint and creating day after day. His first artworks - still with Clockwork Britain, as enigmatic as the look/smile of Mona Lisa or Adidas/Renaissance/hip-hop/ Paintings - are punk, destroy, anti cops, rebel, provocative, etc ...
I understand that you can «  fall in love » with his last portraits, sensitive, colored, and so attractive, but don’t forget that we still can find on them the dots/grids/raster, and the different colors or style that we could find in the Target print ( have a look on it and you will find all the montage ) par example.
Remember also all these mini creativity with puppets ...
etc etc ...
If you like last Pins style that’s ok, but don’t throw the rest at the dustbin