KAC (00:01):

Hi everyone. My name is Kameryn Alexa Carter, and I'm one of the founding editors of Emergent Literary. As editors, one of our desires for the journal is to continue to foray into many different modes, both on and beyond the page. It's out of this desire that I spoke with artist, Princeton Cangé about his work, making process, and some of our mutual obsessions. We truly hope you enjoy it. Of course, you can find us on Twitter @emergentjournal and on Instagram @emergentliterary, you can also visit our website at emergentliterary.com for more.

KAC (00:59):

So you can go ahead and introduce yourself and tell me a little bit about yourself and where we can find you.

PC (01:05):

Definitely. So my name is Princeton Cangé. I am Haitian American. I am the youngest of three. I graduated Tyler School of Art with a BFA in December 2019. Now working at the Fabric Workshop and Museum in Visitor Services, a place I really love, so I guess I would consider myself a practicing artist. Right now I'm working primarily in acrylic and you can find me at princetoncange.com or princeton_cange on Instagram.

KAC (01:35):

Wonderful. Well, I'm so excited to talk to you because even though we've only met briefly once before we already started getting into some really interesting conversation. And I know one of the mutual interests that we have is theology in general, but I just wanted to know how your interests in theologies relate to your image making process, what role that plays in some of the subject matter you choose some of the imagery that you use.

PC (02:04):

Yeah, absolutely. That's so great. I've never had this question before, so I have to figure that out for myself, honestly. So I think the first way that it relates and that it plays into, the things that I make is really on a fundamental level about the things that I am attracted to looking at. So throughout Western art history, from the Renaissance, till now, even like early Netherlandish art, post Greco Roman era, there's been a lot of the art that we hold in high esteem, and a lot of the art that is the most renowned is religious art and art that's been commissioned by the church or by patrons and always had religious themes. And so those are the images that were created by the foremost painters and sculptors of the day, and are just laden with imagery and symbolism and history and metaphor.

PC (03:05):

And I really like on a fundamental level, like really just complex, beautiful images and also speak to like the history of the time and the society of the time and place. And so I find myself attracted to looking at those paintings a lot. So those, I guess, would be like my base influences in terms of when I'm looking to start a work or when I'm finishing something else or when I just need to look at an image, it'll be like looking up an artist from that era, or looking up a specific like type of painting, because like these paintings have been done like over and over and over again for, for instance, like, let's say like the crucifixion or the conviction of Saul, right. And artists have done this like over and over and over again because there are like many churches and many patrons, there were some images and some stories that were super popular at one time that were popular at other times.

PC (04:05):

And it's so interesting to see the iteration of a single image, like through time and, um, what a certain artist was interested in. Um, and I think that, you know, the kind of like reiteration of these stories have so ingrained themselves in the culture that they're almost like a limitless wellspring from which to pull. So I think like having a set narrative, being able to like imbue that narrative with your own ideas and metaphor, is something that's really, for me, it's something that's really, really interesting. It's something that I wanna work towards. And so I would say more so like in the, in the way that these pictures were painted, um, and the form that they took is what is, what is most interesting to me. So it's like, you can have an image of the crucifixion, or you can have an image of like the beheading of St.

PC (04:57):

John, or like, um, the denial of, of St. Peter, right. But by reinventing them, you can access such a wide public while still being unique, while still commenting on the things you want to comment on. And I think like that combination inherently makes for a really complex, reading of the work. So yeah, I would say just like, in, the images that I look at, you know, like I'll look at people like, Caravaggio, like Gentileschi, like Van Eyck like Holbein, DaVinci, um, and all of these artists, all of them from the beginning, like the main thrust of their work is through Christianity and Catholicism. Right. Um, and that's just what it is. I mean, I don't know Buddhism, orIslam, you know, it would be different, but I think like the technique, and the way that society was set up, where there was this craft that kids were, were taught from such a young age, it was like, this is what you do. There's not really, um, a such a wide training. It's like, you start at seven or eight or nine, and then you just paint the rest of your life. So, like, the technique that they had, I think is unmatched because of that, it's like, no one here is starting oil painting at age 12.

KAC (06:29):

Exactly.

PC (06:30):

And continuing straight, and just like not doing high school, not doing college is like, I'm only painting and drawing. So that's a, a bit of a rambly answer, but, in a fundamental way, because I think just like the images that you look at are the primary influence to the images that you make and the images you're interested in. And those are the things that I'm interested in the most.

KAC (06:52):

I love that too, because with Christian images, there are these like identifiable visual signifiers. So you were talking about content translating across time, but there are also these visual setups that get transposed, um, whether it's, you know, a pieta or, um, and so it's just interesting to hear you talk about how, like, not only like, sort of content religious content gets transposed across time into your paintings from your influences, but also like there are these visual translations as well.

PC (07:24):

Absolutely. I think that one of the cues that I've been taking is...so I just, as a little background, I didn't study painting in college. So I just did, like, I don't know, I just put my hands in everything and tried almost everything. In an attempt to just figure out what it is I wanted to do and how each medium worked. But in coming out of a school I had a bunch of oil paints and was like, okay, like, let me, I'm not gonna buy any more art supplies if I don't need to, because it's hella expensive. And I'm also like primarily interested in image-making and I'm like, okay, historically, painting has been the medium in fine arts for image making. So I was like, let me at least get a handle on this.

PC (08:14):

Um, and so a lot of the things that I have really influenced me from, from those paintings, especially like Caravaggio and Gentileschi, Tintoretto, if we can talk about tenebrism and chiaroscuro, is really that technique of like dramatic light and shadow. Um, and the way that, that conveys mood. And I don't know, I've just been, always have been really into like really somber, dark, like moody images. And it's really interesting how just like a simple technique can bring up these other references. Like you were talking about like Mary Magdalene, which I had not previously thought about, but it's like, okay, just, just to see what they did and how they used these techniques, um, can bring in so much more, um, Kerry James Marshall said something like, um, in order to like, be on the same level as the old masters, you have to know what they know and do what they do. So it's like to some, to some extent, it's just like, okay, like what did they do? How did they do that? How can I learn to do that? And then how can I use it?

KAC (09:22):

And in terms of like subverting and reinventing that you've gotta get it down. You know, the idea that like, you have to get technique if you're ever going to sort of reinvent it in your own way.

PC (09:32):

Exactly.

KAC (09:34):

I feel like what you said brings up a conversation between like content and form and the relationship between those things. And I kind of wanted to know what comes to you first. And I know I'm sure it differs for every single work that you do, but I wanted to know, are you ever just like on a train and what you see first is like the physical or what you see first is I wanna paint a man on a train, you know. I wanna know if like the lines come first or, you know, or the actual content itself.

PC (10:05):

Honestly, I think for me, it's definitely the, the form, meaning like the image, definitely. Um, because I think through, so there, there would be like an image, for instance, like an image that I'm really attracted to say like that on a train is a great example. Cause that's literally, I'm literally painting a man on a train, like, oh, wow. <laugh> wow. Yeah. Um, so it's like seeing, like, I'll see this man on a train and like either like, um, draw it from life, like in my sketchbook or I'll take like a really like a really sneaky photo <laugh> and act like I'm on Instagram. And like for this one, for instance, like it'll be something that I do like a sketch of, um, it like, for, for me right now, my mind, because I'm in this mode goes like directly to painting, so it's like, okay, it's gonna be a painting.

PC (10:57):

But first I'm gonna like figure out what's actually going on in the image. So after the image is chosen, I feel like the process of drawing, like really lets you really lets me like, see what's going on. Because you really have to see it in a really like intimate kind of way to translate it onto paper, through charcoal or whatever medium you're using. And then I feel like in that it starts to take on new meaning and through also through the making of it, you can add more complexity. So, for instance, like a man with his hands folded, like head down on a train. And to me, like I saw that when I was like, that man is in prayer because like of my religious upbringing, right. He's praying. That was just like my instant, uh, take.

PC (11:52):

But I think in terms of like starting with image, it's also really interesting to me to like kind of complicate it and add there's always like after the, the main image is always myriad images that I am using to help inform that as well. So like, I'll look back on the other sketch I've done in the subway and other images and, um, think about, you know, like what could be going on inside what's going on outside and then bringing it back to, you know, knowledge of art history and being like, okay, in the Northern Renaissance, if you look at these tiny, tiny paintings, um, you'll see like foreground middle ground background. Um, and these paintings have so much richness and depths that you see what's going on. See like, um, St John in the wilderness or whatever. And he's like looking up into the sky and he's wearing these robes, um, and there's this rocky outcrop and then, but all the way in the distance you see like, like these buildings that are like the city he was exiled from.

PC (12:54):

Right. And I think that, that getting back to the formal again, like that idea of a complete image with foreground, middle ground background and depth and complete context of space and place is something that I'm thinking about with this painting specifically. Cause I'm like, okay, well then you have the man on the train, but you also have the windows right. And so what is the vista that is being seen outside of here and how, how can I treat that and what can that be? So starting with this set image, and then within this image, I have another, in my mind, like other images that provide limitless possibility that will change the reading of the image as a whole. So it's like if I put like mountains on the outside, it's like, okay, like where is the place it's not very specific?

PC (13:38):

Or if I put like, um, row homes, you know, it's like, okay, well now I understand that this like very much in the city. Um, or if I try to subvert that altogether and just try to juxtapose like a, uh, a vineyard outside of like outside of the L outside of the, the train that goes through, North Philly, you'd be trying to like reconcile these two things. So it definitely starts with the image, but then, bringing other images in, from contemporary life and also from art history and trying to figure out how to, how to create a space that's like really compelling. And that also draws the viewer in, in more than one way where you can try to figure out what's going on, but you're also drawn in by the space and the depth of the image. So it definitely, it always starts with an image. It almost always starts with an image, whether it's like from my phone or whether it's from art history,

KAC (14:34):

You brought up, you know, just speaking of phones, I'm wondering how our sensibility for depth has changed with phones, cameras, and sort of, it's interesting that you use a picture as a reference image often because having to like derive the depth or like tune into that is just so different when you know, you're looking at a photograph or, I mean, most when I see something interesting, it's like, I barely see it before I'm taking a picture. Right. So like, I feel like our sensibility just as a culture, um, since (not to sound like an old head, but like,) since we all have cameras in our pockets, right. Our way of tuning into depth and texture is so different because of that, and I wonder if you feel like the camera sort of flattens that depth of field.

PC (15:19):

I mean, I think you bring up a great point. And I think that personally, like many, I don't wanna say everything because I don't want to overgeneralize, but I think more than just the image has been flattened, I think lots of things have been flattened from our reading of the world in general toour interpretation of like complex ideas and reading of identities. I think that in the same way that like the camera kind of reduces depth and texture, I think that the camera and social media and the climate that we live in now has, has really flattened just like our critical discourse in general. And I think that we think that things are a lot simpler than they are, but in terms of the image specifically, I think that's something that I'm working through just in terms of making it.

PC (16:13):

So I'll, I'll say it this way, because I don't have any formal training. I don't know... I only know how to go about the image in one way. Right. Or like, for instance, like, in acrylic, like I'll just do a drawing and I'll draw from the photo. I'll figure out while I'm painting it, and while I'm looking at it, you know, like what, what is coming out of it? What is being flatten and what isn't. And I think that's a question formally of modeling of like playing with your lights and your darks and softening edges and hardening edges to make it seem like, um, like this thing is in space with you. And it's definitely something to contend with, but it's also like, as I consider myself like a pretty inexperienced painter, I don't really have a solution for that per se, other than to kind of create another, another part of the image that is further back.

PC (17:11):

than the primary image I'm using. I mean, the camera definitely, like for sure, that's, without a doubt, but I, I just don't think that we, as most, most artists and most painters now have the luxury of having a model. Um, right. I think now we're used to, we're used to reading these images in this way. I think so many images most are made from photos if they're, if there are, if they're representational, but I think that painters have had success, many successes or failures in doing that. I think that a lot of, a lot of paintings I, I realized like, are, are very flat and are purposefully so.Like, if you, I feel like you'll feel like a lot of just like, kind of in the, in the mold of Barkley Hendricks, where you'll see like this figure, and then it'll be like a yellow ground or like a white ground.

PC (18:02):

Um, and there's no doubt. It's just like a figure around the background and it's right there. It's very flat. But even if you look at say like a Jordan Casteel where it's about space and place, but at the same time, it is taken from an image and it does have a certain amount of depth, but I'm not sure how that is read exactly. So I'm just, I'm just trying my best to kind of subvert that in terms of like the, the only way I know how, which is to make an, another image on top of that or behind it. But I do think the camera has definitely fundamentally changed the way that we see the world and that we see each other. And definitely like the ubiquity of images. Like we don't take the, the time to really try to figure out what's going on. And I think that that has translated across a lot of the different disciplines and a lot of different modes of seeing the world and interacting with each other.

KAC (18:56):

You talked about this idea of juxtaposing an image on an image. And that made me think of not only the way that you use color to sort of create contrast, but also your collages. I wanted to hear you talk about collage and the way that painting can interact with other media, in a physical way.

PC (19:15):

Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. Um, so I think like my, my most meaningful interaction with collage came a little bit ago, maybe like a few months. I have a friend Sonnie Wooden who lives also in Chicago. He invited me to collaborate with him on his MFA thesis show, which was in Philadelphia. He was living in Chicago. So it was like, I was kind of in the installation and in the reception of the show, I kind of embodied Sonnie because I was like his representative. But it was also like he came up with the text and I came up with image and the way that I went about creating the image and was primarily through collage. There's this image by Caravaggio... Conversion On the way to Damascus is what it's called. And it's the story of Saul of Tarsus, who was like a great persecutor of the Jews.

PC (20:09):

And, and then there's this moment. It was responsible for like one of the first martyrs recorded in the new Testament. And there's this moment in scripture where he either sees Christ or sees a light on the road to Damascus, and they arrest him and he's like, Saul why are you persecuting me? And it's like, in that moment where he turns just like a complete 180 and becomes like the most fervent and the most famous advocate and missionary for the gospel. Right. So it's this amazing, amazing painting that captures that moment and Saul is like on the ground and there's this light coming out of like the right hand, top right hand corner. And he's looking up at a light and he's like being arrested by it. And I was just so drawn to that in terms of it spoke to me about a relinquishing of power. It spoke to me about like a spiritual and even physical ecstasy. So that was something that I had been thinking about for a long time, um, and had been drawing over and over and been finding like in different paintings, like similar poses.

KAC (21:16):

<affirmative>.

PC (21:17):

And so for me, collage is it really comes out of drawing. So I'll be doing a lot of drawing. And then for me, the process is like drawing, printing out, cutting out, and then essentially like having these pieces that I'm playing with. So like, I'll draw a horse, a number of different times, I'll draw the figure in repose. Right. And then I'll draw the background. I'll draw different types of clouds. I'll so it's like, it's almost like, I think about it a lot through printmaking. So thinking about a lot of the, the collage pieces of like matrices and just playing around with it until you get a composition that, that works. And so that's what I really love about collage is the malleability. And then like, taking that for me to like, take that and then essentially like blow it up. And, and of course it changes a lot in the process and through the, the, um, medium that you're using.

PC (22:05):

But I think that that collage really provide a lot of freedom and experimentation. And that was something I was looking for at the moment in painting, because I was just painting from images in order to like, understand color mixing and what liquid does and what oil does solvents do. But I think the collage gave me a lot of freedom and invited like this real sense of play. And also this, this other way to kind of subvert what we were talking about, which is just like, okay, well, if you have an image and it's flat and we're already used to that, like how do we complicate it? How do we make it more complex? How do we try to slow down the reading? And so that's, that's me where collage is really useful.

KAC (22:46):

Before you had mentioned intimacy. And I wanted to talk with you about it because why I recently wrote a very angry lament about like our culture's lack of intimacy and performative closeness that we have. And I've been thinking about intimacy as because it's not just emotional proximity or physical proximity. And so it's somewhere in between. And, I was thinking about some of your portraits, like you have these portraits of your grandma and you kind of talked about sketching being a more intimate experience. So I just wanted to hear you talk about that a little bit, because even in terms of form, like there's a way of feeling intimate with a painting or a sketch but then also how do you create emotional intimacy as well? I mean, that's a big question, right? That none of us have the answer to, but I guess I just wanna know what your relationship to that concept is both in making, but also just in general.

PC (23:47):

For me, I don't really think about intimacy so much in terms of, um, image making. But now that you mentioned it, I think that that is inherent to the structures that we used a lot early on before cameras were invented, which is like the, the life drawing and all of these like images of my grandmom for instance, were drawn from life. Um, they're very simple, like mostly line drawings and you know, she's in bed or she's sitting down, so she's a great model because she doesn't move. And I think that the intimacy that one can feel from there is directly coming from the process of just being there and looking and having this subject, this real person. Although I'm saying she doesn't move, but everybody's always moving, you know, in real time. And trying to capture that, trying to capture an expression, trying to capture something that is almost inherently ephemeral is like... I look at you for one moment and then you change or I'm drawing you over a two hour period. Like at the end of two hours, you're going to be visibly more tired than you were at the beginning. And that's all the things that you can capture with tiny, tiny marks and tiny strokes of the brush and nuances and color. So I think that that really comes through in the life drawing because it's kind of inherent to the technique also in terms of proximity, both, both emotional and, and physical, even spiritual, ancestral is like,

PC (25:19):

It's already there. Right? I'm looking at my grandmom, everything there's so much loaded in that, but when I just like pull an image out internet, or if I just, you know, see this man praying on the train, I kind of have to imbue it with my own sense of personality or, or intimacy in terms of like, okay, I'm projecting what I think is happening. And the emotions that I'm feeling and that, or that I think the subject is feeling. Yeah.

KAC (25:44):

It kind of makes me think that like when we are looking at a work not to get to esoteric, but we are essentially looking at looking right. Or we are looking at the process of-- the product of someone looking. And so for me, like when I saw those sketches, like the amount of intimacy that I felt for them, I think came from all of that coding that was already imbued in your relationship with her, as well as the like temporal and also physical proximity. But I also think that like, it kind of broke down that feeling of being like an outsider, looking into something that was looked at that was rendered, right. Like it felt like I was in the room with her. And I think that what you're saying about life drawing is so, so true. And that makes so much more sense, especially with the idea that it's, it's so quick and it's so instantaneous almost, even though obviously you did a series of them that does have a certain amount of closeness and immediacy and intimacy... well, you mentioned identity before and as we both know, that is a slippery slope.

KAC (26:50):

And also, like it's Wednesday, if you don't feel <laugh>, you know, you just wake up as a black person sometimes. And you're just like, I don't, like, I don't wanna,

PC (26:58):

I don't wanna do that. I

KAC (26:59):

Don't want to like talk about being black. I just wanna be black. Um,

PC (27:02):

Right.

KAC (27:03):

And it was funny too, because, you know, before we started recording, we were joking about like studying race. I'm doing for those listeners, I'm doing air quotes, within the academy and sort of like the inherent danger of that. And I know in your bio, you kind of mention like viewers confronting their own implicit biases about the images that you present. And in a way I, as a writer have a certain experience with people sort of transposing me onto my work, but also me transposing myself onto my work. And so I'm just interested in the ways, race and gender, um, particularly play into the way you expect or desire for your viewers... just because, you know, when, when certain populations look at our works, they're going to see what they wanna see essentially. And so I'm just interested in sort of your thoughts about that.

PC (27:59):

Well, I, I guess first I'll say I've been taking a lot less consideration in thinking about that recently, because I'm not really thinking about the viewer so much, like in the moment like that I'm making it, I'm really not thinking about like, who's gonna be confronting it and who's gonna be interacting with it. Like that's for them to deal with. If you look back at like, I don't know, 1650, or 1780, or whenever the fuck in European Western history, and you look at any painter that was painting. Every person that come came up to that painting had something else that, that they were holding, that they brought to the work. And I think that today that is the case, but just the identity politics of it all has been inflamed. Right? Like I feel personally that a white person that comes up to one of my paintings and a black person can feel the same level of closeness and intimacy or alienation from that image.

PC (28:59):

Because I also think that I am the product of a space that is not clearly defined in American culture, right? Like I don't come from a typical like black family, like black Americans. I don't fit into that mold. And I'm don't fit into many other molds being Haitian American and being homeschooled and growing up with a community of my family and then going to Christian school, going public school, it is just like a crazy trajectory and all these different spaces that I've had to navigate. But I think going back to one of our commonalities, like growing up religious and growing up in a, in a Christian church has informed a lot of my interest and my sensibilities. So in terms of how the viewer's gonna respond to my work, the responses in my mind are gonna be so varied that it's like, I'm not even like I'm gonna control the things that I can control.

PC (29:52):

Right? It's like, I can control how this face is rendered versus how the cloth is rendered. Right. And I can control what's in, in the background and what's in the foreground and I can control the colors that I use. And I know that these formal decisions are going to affect the visual reading of the work, whatever the audience brings with it, that's what it's gonna be affected by not my personal identity or not what I think it's gonna be, it's like really like what's physically in front of them. And so I don't feel it a necessity to like only paint black people or like only paint my experience or do anything of the sort I'm, I'm only really interested in figuring out how I can make an image that I'm looking at and that I'm making as interesting and compelling as possible. Yeah, I'm really, I'm really moreso thinking about the image and less about the viewer and that moment where they interact.

PC (30:48):

and if I am privileged enough to be there and to talk to that person, it gives me a lot of insight into how the work is being translated and interpreted. And that's a really, really interesting, amazing, and like really generative because it lets me understand okay, if a person is projecting this onto the work and I'm hearing this again and again and again, like, okay, I'll keep that in mind. Like the next time I do something similar, but that doesn't happen very often, you know, outside of art school and outside of like gallery openings for like a day. So I'm really more focused on like, what can I do in the studio and in the making of it so that I can push the reading in one way or another. Um, no matter who the viewer is.

PC (31:31):

I think that we are foregrounding identity so much, so much to the detriment of the art itself and critical reading of the work. And I'm just like pining for what is, what is the work doing? What is it doing conversation with other work? And what does it say about how we are living now? And how does it comment on the history of all the things that has, has come before that has come before that? So that those are the things that are preeminent in my mind when I'm making and what the viewer will bring is like, what they'll bring, you know? And for me, the thing is like, does it look good? Yeah. <laugh> I'm like, do you think it looks good? Does it look good? Okay. Like fire that's great. <laugh> like, there's so many levels of also like meaning imbued in it.

PC (32:16):

There is something there for like the person that has read the book that I was reading at the time, who is really interested in this theory. But the work is also here for someone who's just like, oh, I love this color. I think there's something about like our collective suffering that have made us a huge community come together and like, try to define what's going on. But I feel like that that definition and that continual definition and trying to get more and more specific is, is definitely like a trap in a lot of ways, because it's just impossible. And it only increases generalization and lack of specificity. And I feel that like, as artists, we need to trust that 10, 15, 30, a hundred, 200 years down the road, our identities and our biographies will be imbued in the work.

PC (33:08):

You know, if it has the privilege to last that long, then people will know who we are. They'll know what we've done. Like that's what art historians are for. <laugh> Let's do the thing that we are trained to do. And for me, it's like create images and try to have complex dialogues. Right. Try to figure out the core questions of like, why are we here? What are we doing? How can we move forward? How can I create something that is an incredibly pleasurable or incredibly violent or incredibly disruptive viewing experience? I was like just watching a documentary on the National Gallery of Art and they put on the show of Leonardo. And it's like, they're finding things about, about Leonardo that like, I'm sure, like he didn't even care about they're doing the work that is required to like figure out what an artist who an artist was, what is their process?

PC (33:58):

What is their identity? How did they work? What were they interested? And it's like that all that should just come through the work. And I'm really interested in just like foregrounding the work people can interpret it however they like, but I'm counting on the academic side and the, the scholars and art historians, if my work has the privilege to actually, you know, like years down the road after grad school, like end up in institutions and be housed in these places that that work will be done. And that's not something I'll have to worry about in front of me. I have this, um, mentor who had a mentor who said, use this right in front of you. And I've been using that philosophy just like, without even knowing it. It's just like, okay, I have paint. I'm gonna use paint. I have wood. I'm gonna use wood. I have a screen I'm gonna use this screen.

PC (34:41):

Like, so yeah, just, just trying to figure out technique and formal things, because that's a thing that's gonna compel the viewer at the end of the day. You know, that's the thing that's really gonna speak and really gonna have resonance down the line. So I'm just focused on training and I just wanna get, get better and better in terms of like rendering. And as that gets better, you know, my ideas will become more refined and I'll see more of a through line through my work. And so like, everything else will fall in place. I try not to, to make work about certain things so much. Though I have definitely done that. I feel like I've hopefully been a little more successful later in life, but I'm more trusting that all the things that I'm doing, all the books that I'm reading, all the conversations that I'm having will come out in a certain type of sophistication in the work mm-hmm <affirmative>. Um, and I'm just trusting that that will happen as I think about systems and ideas in more complex ways and gain more information and read more history. And as I become more facile with, you know, handling paint and rendering images or not rendering, and mm-hmm, <affirmative>, you know, finding space between, uh, representation and abstraction and figuring out what different parts of the images are doing with each other and next to each other. Um,

KAC (36:08):

Also just the use what's right in front of you is not only literal too. Right. I mean, I think that's actually, an interesting guide even in terms of the things we were talking about with like personal experience and sort of self representation within your work, if you just think of it as using what's right in front of you, that sort of pressure to represent kind of falls away because you're making, you know, you're just in the act of making from your experience from materials, your immediate environment, you know?

PC (36:40):

Yeah. But there's something in that, that, that, that is also kind of slippery. Like, I feel like definitely like using what's in front of you and doing, say like self-portraiture, or I don't know, like yeah. Actually using like the images that are in front of you as, as well as the materials and the ideas that are in front of you. But I've been thinking a lot about like decentering of one's self in one's work. Well, I think we live in a very like narcissist culture, and you can see that across the board and in the fine arts and in painting a lot of it, that is when the artist has their own agency, right. When it's not like commercial not commercial photography or fashion photography or whatever, talking about like painting, I was painting specifically, there is this, this, this like will to like represent yourself, especially if you've been historically excluded.

PC (37:30):

from the narrative. And I totally understand that, but I think that also that can sometimes veer into, into narcissism. And because when you make yourself the subject of a painting in a lot of ways, you are making yourself the most important thing to be viewed. Yeah. Right. These thing to be looked at. And I think that there's so much going on. I don't think any individual, you know, can really take that place. Like I, I think about portraits a lot, I was like, you are taking in my mind taking the place of Christ, a lot of the time. Cause if you look at, you know, if you look at the history of art from images of the crucifixion to, um, Salvator Mundi to altar pieces, like Christ is always at the center and if you put yourself like you are the subject of the painting you can definitely inhabit and embody a lot of things.

PC (38:27):

But I also think that you can lose sight of, as your focus narrows, I think you can also lose sight of a lot of other things that can make, bring a lot of more things into the work. So I think it's, it's definitely, it's definitely double-sided mm-hmm <affirmative> but I personally, in my work I've been thinking about like, trying to, because I've been, I've been doing that a lot. Like I'm the subject of a lot of what I do and been realizing that I was like, okay, well, what would happen if I decenter? And I become like just a spectator to what's happening a spectator outside the frame or even inside the frame. And I think, yeah, I don't know. I've just been thinking about that a lot. And I would like to, you'll probably see that I don't know, months from now, um, <laugh> come out in, in a painting trying to

PC (39:14):

Like, hold space for yourself. And definitely like you're cause you're gonna be in there no matter what, right. You're the one making the work. So I feel like I don't necessarily need to represent myself, you know, be like, oh, like I am a black man or a, or Haitian American. So it's important for other kids to see me. It's like, well, it's also important for little black kids to see any other image. Like, I, I think that, I don't don't think that because there's a black person or a black figure in an image like that, doesn't personally, that doesn't compel me any more than if there's a white person in the image. I'm only compelled by like what's happening. And is it holding me or is it not, is it repelling me? It's really about like the dialogues that can happen. You know, whether it's like about the work or like you were saying, like being like a black person in a room, like, is there another black person, are there other people that I can have this dialogue with where we can get to somewhere that's different. And I think that, that is really the core of what representation in art really means is like adding new voices and adding to the critical discourse. But if the critical discourse ends in identity, then I don't think we've gone very far.

KAC (40:21):

I don't think it's discourse at all. You know?

PC (40:24):

I mean, shiiiit

KAC (40:26):

Gets back to the flattening that you were talking about. And, but I feel, and it's funny that you kind of mentioned the experience of growing up in church, because that was one of the few places where I felt like, you know, there's this obsessive, like, we, like people say we all the time now and like, okay, who are you talking about? Cause like, I don't think I'm included in that number. Right, right. Like who is the we, because we're not on Uhhuh. Um, and being in church was one of the few experiences growing up where I felt we like, I, I was like, okay, we're in the, we, I feel some sense of camaraderie and connection with people like you, even though, obviously I just met you. that we're able to have these really freeing conversations about art and personhood, and there's no sense of performativity or need to feel like you have to say the right thing. And you know, we're not walking artist statements, right. Like this conversation. And even though people will listen to it. There's no pressure to feel like you have to perform. And that has been really important for me in terms of interacting with other black and brown artists. And I mean, I think that's just important, like whether we're in an official room or not, like I wanna create rooms with people wherever. And

PC (41:40):

Yeah.

KAC (41:41):

I think I, I would say that, that this is like, sort of like a room, you know, even though you're across the country,

PC (41:47):

No same here. It's briefly, you're talking about like, not feeling any pressure to perform. And it's like, well, I think we're both in our twenties and it's like, okay, well it's like, you know, whatever I say here, my thoughts and ideas are going to evolve and change continually for

KAC (42:02):

in an hour, maybe,

PC (42:04):

You know? So it's like, they're gonna become challenged. They're gonna become more complex. They're gonna change. This is just a discussion, you know, it's gonna be interesting to see like hear this like five years from now. And being like, what the fuck was I talking about? And nothing is probably what I'll say. Yeah. I mean, it's, it's also like allowing part of like the non performance is like allowing room for growth is like not acting like, you know, everything or like, even that, you know, most things like, I just... You know, I, I really appreciate the space and this freedom. And I really love, you know, having this discussion and hopefully we can continue to have, um, our discussions, you know, down the road.

KAC (42:42):

Yeah, absolutely. I'm just excited for people to be able to interact with your work. And I'm really, really thankful for the opportunity to chat with someone that's just so interesting. And, I just feel a sense of like community with you and, and I think that's really exciting. Um,

PC (43:01):

Yeah, no, I do too. And shout out, shout out to George

KAC (43:04):

I know for connecting us

PC (43:05):

Yeah, this is great.

KAC (43:10):

Hi again, everyone. I just wanted to remind you that you can visit Princeton's website, princetoncange.com and follow him on Instagram at princeton_cange. And don't forget, you can also visit our website, emergentliterary.com and follow us on socials for more. Submissions are currently open on a rolling basis. So get those submissions in! Thanks and talk soon. Bye.