On Saturday, July 31, 2021,12:05 PM, I set foot in Wönzimer once again for another paramount showcase of works. This one, in particular, is one of the most significant in the canon. My bold statement stems from the newly produced Imperfectionist manifesto and contemporary movement behind this show and the talented artists involved. The show is on view until its closing reception on Friday the 13th from 5:00 to 9:00 PM.
Thanks to the innovation of Wönzimer’s co-directors amidst a global pandemic, visitors may always encounter the artwork through the safety of their own home or by participating in fully masked in-person visitations. For inquiring about the works displayed, do not hesitate to get in touch with the gallery via email at wonzimerinfo@gmail.com.
Salon de Imperfectionism is interactive but offers a contactless experience. The exhibition catalogue is available through a QR code scan via a smartphone camera. The printed code is posted on one of the support pillars at the entrance and scanned via virtual reality or in-person.
The delta variant of COVID-19 has bulldozed its way through Los Angeles, but 53% of California’s population has been fully vaccinated. Serious hospitalizations have consisted mainly of the unvaccinated.
The earliest stages of Salon de Imperfectionism solely existed in the mind of Alaïa Parhizi, the show’s curator and Wönzimer’s co-director. This exhibition has been a long time coming, seven years to be exact. The show began with a manifesto that was later refined by Alaïa Parhizi and Lucien Dante Lazar. At the previous showing, Irreverent Objects, I spoke with Parhizi about his ambitions. He was at the earliest planning stage for his manifesto, Imperfectionism, which inspired Salon de Imperfectionism. After hearing his musings back in May and seeing them reach fruition now has been magic.
The manifesto behind the show was constructed in response to the perfect design by AI and robotics and the perfect ideal from 3-D printing. Human creation creates a blemish, generating an emotionality that Man can only produce. In the words of Gary Brewer, the author of Salon de Perfectionism’s press release, “[AI artworks] take away from the human elements of making: the idiosyncrasies of the body, how one’s touch affects the emotional content of an object or a painting … In Islamic architecture, the design often included deliberate mistakes as a show of humility by artists who believe that only God can produce perfection”.
As stated above, Alaïa Parhizi and Lucien Dante Lazar co-wrote the manifesto, Imperfectionism. The artists selected are known as Imperfectionists. Manifestos are especially popular among the Italian contemporary art scene and have been since the 20th-century Futurist movement.
The show touches on two elements only Man can demonstrate in art. The first concept originates from ancient Japan, and Alaïa Parhizi coined the second: (1.) wabi-sabi (acceptance of transience & imperfection) (2.) imperfectionism (hubris, humility, and the Pathways to the Imagination). In all honesty, it is somewhat easy to point out which works are generated by an AI versus a human being as computer generated work lacks hubris or imperfection.
Using Instagram, New American Paintings made a game out of it. On Wednesday, July 28, at 8 AM, their account, @newamericanpaintings, hosted an interactive poll via the story feature. The options were “Robot or Human” before revealing the answer. I guessed correctly with an abstract painting by the robot, AI-Da. AI-Da, a female artificial intelligence, is famous for creating abstract paintings and eerie self-portraits. When I further researched her, her self-portraits evoked an ick response from me that existed within the realm of the uncanny valley.
The rendering of her supposed “sense of self” felt almost human but devoid of life, creepy. Despite her many solo exhibitions and being featured in TIME Magazine, Ai-Da will never be “imperfect” or produce works “wabi-sabi” because she is neither of those things. The Imperfectionists delivered what robot artists like Ai-Da or Ollynol cannot. Her alleged self-awareness was too literal. Technical skills can be programmed but emotionality and seeing color beyond an artificial lens is an advantage we have over the robots. There are nuances in color the human eye captures over an AI’s generated image or camera.
To experience life is crucial in order to represent it in art. For example, Imperfectionism member Dusty Santa Maria’s I’ll Start Smoking When I’m 80 speaks to the human experience and does not solely rely on technical skill. As the painting does offer aesthetic value, it is the concept of the work that is built around the idea of impermanence. The idea that smoking could shorten life and choosing to smoke when death is near anyway, is humorous and uniquely breathing. The application of the paint is expressionist in nature: intentionally irregular strokes perpetuate a less literal sense of self, abstracted for the sake of narrative. Compelling storytelling is a known phenomenon in humans, not artificial intelligence. I’ll Start Smoking When I’m 80 possessed imagination and transience, as did every other artwork I saw, hung salon-style or propped onto a pedestal.
The Imperfectionists: Cheyann Washington, Liv Aanrud, Daniela Parhizi, Retro 1999, Mark Acetelli, Nick Hunt, HK Zamani, Alaïa Parhizi, Lucien Dante Lazar, Hannah Waiters, Courtney Odell, Fu Site, Matthew Jackson, Mangda Sengvanhpheng, Alexis Soul Gray, Sam Valdez, Joshua Ross, Ian Douglass, Jung Yun, Elisa Rossi, Carl Sebastian Rosen, James Mathers, Cyril Kuhn, Khang Nguyen, Patrick Semple, Constantin Werner, Julia Nejman, Sinclair Vicisitud, Caleb Saint Julian, John Greer, Vita Eruhimovitz, Kate Nova Williams, Lino Bernabe, Etty Yaniv, Lea Petmezas, Catherine Haggarty, Sarah Skogland, Sarah Kanennin, John Robert Roy, Carylann Loeppky, Margot Becker, Isaac Haynes, Katie Smart, Serafina Harris, Daniel Nielsen
Is This How You Art 