GET HUBBIED

Wow, if I meet with any more brilliant and exciting people this week I think I'll explode. Joe's meeting was atop the Kimmel one - the same day! I barely had time to walk the dog, and get some refreshments for Joe before he was walking through the door. There we were again. Liz, Jon and I, explaining our intentions, our wishes, our fog and our clarity. It was a mash-up of personality that, again went so incredibly well. I was chuffed with myself for bringing them all together I admit. There is a certain satisfaction with watching people ignite each others imaginations.

Joe listened patiently as we got our bearings and repeated ourselves but then got into the grit of our thinking on the topic at hand, which is the verbiage of a wedding, the ceremony's crux, the statements to each other and the organization of such moments. 'Teetering', a word that came up early in our talk, is what I see as the goal to seek. We want to be subversive, and funny and prod the structures that be, but at the same time to embrace the actual happening - the two people committing publicly to each other in front of their near and dear.

Joe is the perfect fit for this teeter in my estimation. I have seen his performance work, and his skill as an entertainer is as strong as his skill as a pusher of boundaries. The comedy he controls that taps into the tragic or uncomfortable for a second (or much much longer), crosses back into comedy again; this a talent the likes of a symphony conductor. You, the audience, are awakened to the place beyond comedy, and are (hopefully) awakened to the line he has crossed and come back from with humor and a solid gaze. His work reminds me of Buster Keaton mixed with David Mamet; Henry Miller mixed with Betty Boop, or cowboy movies mixed with kareoke. There's the teetering, and the skill in knowing just when you're about to go too far - to control the room, and know your goal. In this case, the work will be a dialogue with Jon and Liz, through which will form a solid notion - a ceremony paying attention to the couple and their deep affection for each other and the witnesses, but also prodding at the structural norms of weddings that people repeat blindly.

There were so many ideas that came out of our talk, I dare not say. It would lead or mislead. Suffice it to say there were mentions of power-point, legal documents becoming characters in the ceremony and the norm wedding sped up and then unveiling the un-norm, but truer self. It will be a dialogue worth checking in on. Again, Liz and Jon were pushed into talking about things not in their normal dialoguing. It may be uncomfortable at times, but I hope they feel comfortable with that.

But even better, these three drawings of Joe's I find particularly relevant to Get Hubbied: the missile drawings re: the conversation about the conflict between wanting to get married and not knowing why you'd want to get married: a yes and a no. We've been talking about using text on the wedding garments themselves announcing that conflict. Head Exploding- well, isn't that obvious.

Yes Missile 2010, watercolor and pencil on paper, 30 x 24"

No Missile 2010, watercolor and pencil on paper, 30 x 24"

Head Exploding 2010, watercolor and pencil on paper, 22 x 24"