Napkin Doodles And Naked Emperors With Jun Cha
Photo: Toby Caughron
Napkin Doodles And Naked Emperors With Jun Cha
By Cullen Poythress
Use to be good art was good art—defined by obvious skill not commercial marketability. Today though, just exactly what constitutes good art by artistic standards is ambiguous at best. The commercial world tells us what’s good, the art of celebrities famous for things other than art tells us what’s good, and the merits and appraisals of those “qualified” also tells us what’s good. But just how much of what we celebrate is actually worth celebrating, and how much of it is a case of The Emperor’s New Clothes? Maybe there’s no exact answer, but if one thing’s for sure, it’s that real talent always seems to bubble to the surface while the fine linens of the emperor’s new robe always tend to evaporate exposing the pasty white ass underneath.
21-year-old Jun Cha has spent the better part of his life studying Collegiate-level art, learning the techniques of Renaissance era painters, and apprenticing under some of the original masters of single needle black and grey tattooing. I recently stopped by Jun’s Santa Monica studio to get his take on art and what makes it. Here’s some of what he had to say:
If I doodle on a napkin does that make me an artist?
Yes and no. It just depends on what you define an artist to be. I’m thinking of a Picasso story right now. Supposedly Picasso was doodling on napkin one time and there was a guy talking to him and asking for the drawing. Picasso wanted a million dollars for it. The guy asked why and he said it took him 20 years to get to that point as an artist. I don’t think you can be bias about what an artist is or isn’t. If you’re scribbling with passion, then you’re an artist.
So if Picasso can sell his napkin doodle for a million dollars, why can’t I sell mine for that much? I scribble with passion.
If you’ve been scribbling with passion your whole life, the growth should show in both your labor and character. After the hard work, sure, I guess you could sell the napkin for money, but only after you’ve evolved as an artist and grown into your true individual potential. I think again you have to take in both perspectives. If you’re the viewer or consumer, what’s selling is both the art and the artist. If you’re the creator, the real reward is the experience of the process it took to create it.
Let’s say you’re a career political scientist and spent your entire life studying government. Would it bum you out to see an action movie star like Arnold Schwarzenegger so easily waltz into the Governor’s mansion?
I guess I would have mixed feelings. It would depend on the situation. If it were something like politics it would definitely be disappointing. Our governor is a prime example of a disaster. It’s not really his fault, it’s our fault. We put him there.
What do you mean by that?
We put him in that role. He only got elected because of the lack of attention people pay in politics, details, and information in general. It goes hand in hand with the same way artists or any other famous figures end up getting credit. Some people just don’t pay attention. It’s not like it’s good or bad, there’s a certain level of responsibility that any person needs to take if he or she is going into another realm other than what he or she is known for. They have to take the same respect and care into what they’re pursing, that they did with whatever got them famous.
To what extent does the artist make the art versus the art itself making the art?
It really falls back on the viewer. The artistic dialogue you have with the viewer determines that relationship. I think there’s a big difference between persona driven art and passion driven art. There’s examples of people who’ve spent their entire lives on their work and they’ve elevated to the point where it turns into the opposite—their persona has a stronghold over what they do. Good examples would be artists like Takashi Murakami or Jeff Koons who’ve spent their majority of their careers passionately creating work to where it’s now evolved into critics pointing out their personas more than their art. I think its cool either way and it’s interesting when it happens. Warhol is another great example of that.
Photo: Toby Caughron
Does the artist coming before the art cheapen the art?
There’s no excuse for poor quality or poor execution in any artistic realm. I don’t necessarily think it cheapens it. It all depends on how you look at it. In the fine art world, it happens all the time—the name always precedes the art. In tattoos it doesn’t always work that way, but personally I feel a priority for the work itself. Art today is very different from how it was in the Renaissance period or even as early as ten years ago. It wasn’t so much of an ego issue to create work for the church or to try to build an image or celebrity persona. Those artists were laboring away. It was all about the craft. They were creating the craft and building a foundation where there was none. The objectives are different now, perspectives are different, and the whole game is different.
How long has it taken you to find your mediums and feel comfortable with your style?
I feel like I’m still in the process of that and I always will be. I’ve been doing art my whole life and I don’t think I’ve reached any type of conclusion. If you were to stop that process it would be the end of what you’re going to do. If I say I know it all when I’m 50, than there’s a big problem.
Do you have to know the rules to break them?
When I was learning art, I was told that there were no rules. There’s just tools provided to help you do certain things. I don’t like to look at it as rigid and having set formulas. If you look at art and its continuous pattern, it’s always changing itself and transcending the boundaries that are there. Breaking rules is a part of the process.
Are there people out there that get away with breaking artistic rules that don’t even know them? Emperors with new clothes?
There are a lot of people like that. But that’s the world we live in. The core doesn’t necessarily drive things anymore. The person that has the most money or the people that happen to be surrounded by certain groups that get them places is all a part of it. In the end it doesn’t matter if that happens, though. In the end the ones that went the long route will always surface to the top based on the quality of their work. You can’t hide. You may be able to slide your way through it for a certain period of time, but at the end of the day you’re not fooling anybody.
Is it possible to stay true to your work and have commercial appeal at the same time?
It’s definitely possible. I think a lot of that is in the control of the individual. There’s definitely a responsibility for that individual to keep that integrity. There are examples on both ends, but it’s important to keep that integrity. Commercially you can still do things and be a certain way, but the core of where your work comes from has to come from who you are. People pick up on that. That’s a big reason why I’ve been able to grow. What keeps me going is being passionate and being true to whatever it is I’m doing, studying the craft and being grateful for it. It’s so awesome to be able to live and do what you love. It’s a gift. All the commercial stuff is a luxury to the hard work and integrity that we’re talking about.
aos. Guaranteed
