Sailor Barfight 1981 2012

Editor: So this is Joe Machine’s "Sailor Barfight 1981," created in 2012, using oil paint. It's…intense, to say the least. All this blood and violence. The brushstrokes feel really raw. What do you make of it? Curator: Well, let's consider the materiality. The thick oil paint, applied with such visible energy, speaks to the labor involved. Machine isn't just depicting violence; he's performing it on the canvas through the very act of painting. Look at how the bodies are constructed with heavy outlines, almost like slabs of meat. Does this connect to a certain working-class masculinity, perhaps? Editor: I can see that. The way he handles the oil paint makes them appear roughed-up, definitely. So the process sort of reinforces the content? Curator: Exactly. Consider too that he titled this “Sailor Barfight 1981,” even though he painted it much later. What significance might that earlier date have? Was it a real event that impacted him? Or, rather, does that specific choice indicate how his paintings engage with broader anxieties about masculinity and working class representation within his specific socio-historical milieu? It challenges those nice divisions between "high" art and what some might dismiss as lower subject matter, focusing instead on the social conditions and materials that shape the image. Editor: It's fascinating how he connects the paint, the subject, and his own background to make a broader statement about…toughness, maybe? Curator: "Toughness," perhaps, or perhaps he is using violent tropes to create an uneasy image reflecting his audience and his experience. It's a challenge to easy categorizations, and I think it highlights the power dynamics embedded in both the art world and society itself. Editor: I hadn't really considered how the material itself contributed to the meaning so much. I’m seeing now how his choices affect the reading. Thanks! Curator: My pleasure. Remember, art is rarely about just what we see. It’s about how it's made, and why.