A change of style

April 11, 2006 4:42 PM

Robert Gregory Griffeth has deleted all of his galleries and in their place has posted these 12 enigmatic panels and a tracker (which, if accurate, tells me that there are a couple of hundred puzzled punters a day). [more inside]
posted by tellurian (15 comments total)

For those not familiar with his work, here are some examples [All links NSFW] 1, 2, 3. Does that last link contain a clue as to what might have happened? "Now on the obsession that everything on earth is laced with codes and secret messages and all things may be the opposite of which it seems, his work has taken a new direction to see what can be found by taking a closer look into this unknown."
posted by tellurian at 4:42 PM on April 11, 2006

From the page source:

The images are from a destrubing life of mental and physical abuse combined with his love of the female form which he combindes to make many of his early works, much of which were misunderstood by the general public and many he now refuses to show today. After having a 10 year period of trying to deal with galleries and publications with little success due to his reclusive nature of the public he now is content to exist mainly through the web getting out his past and current visions which these days he rarely puts on prints unlike that drive he had in the early 90's. Now on the obession that everything on earth is laced with codes and secret messages and all things may be the opposite of which it seems, his work has taken a new direction to see what can be found by taking a closer look into this unknown.
who are the photographers, if any, who inspired you during your early years? and who do you consider an inspiration at this moment? i always like the photographers that made their images look more like paintings or had a surreal aspect to them..there are a zillion more protographers out there today because of the web...some are really great, but as far as names i don't know...i don't want to leave anyone out so i just reather not say.
you say you have been working with film and paper. what do you think about new digital technologies and could they be part of your way of working sometimes in the future?...maybe (most likely)..i am trying all sorts of things but have not found anything i like better than the method i have been using since 1990...i do a little digital now for my site but none with the images i print....i think in the future i will only be doing work for the site online...that is where my workings are really only seen.
how long has your official site been online? do you follow it personally? since 1998 in many different versions...it seems to change about every six months with my mood. i build it up then just erase it and start over all the time.

posted by monju_bosatsu at 4:52 PM on April 11, 2006

!!! thanks monju_bosatsu. What on earth prompted you to view the source?
posted by tellurian at 5:03 PM on April 11, 2006

The real enigma here is how this page's JavaScript manages to hang Firefox for a good 30 seconds when I mouseover any of the pictures without actually doing anything at all. Is it factoring fucking primes or something?
posted by IshmaelGraves at 6:32 PM on April 11, 2006

I suppose the fact that he comes across as mildly or fully batshit crazy mitigates the fact that his photography is execrable.
posted by docpops at 6:44 PM on April 11, 2006

nice title tag.
posted by puke & cry at 7:11 PM on April 11, 2006 [1 favorite]

!!! thanks monju_bosatsu. What on earth prompted you to view the source?

That's usually the first place to check for clues with wacky pages such as this.
posted by puke & cry at 7:13 PM on April 11, 2006 [1 favorite]

who are the photographers, if any, who inspired you during your early years? and who do you consider an inspiration at this moment? i always like the photographers that made their images look more like paintings or had a surreal aspect to them..there are a zillion more protographers out there today because of the web...some are really great, but as far as names i don't know...i don't want to leave anyone out so i just reather not say.

Mldly or fully batshit crazy? This guy's source reads like a FPP!
posted by VulcanMike at 7:22 PM on April 11, 2006

Aw c'mon docpops -- we're talking SATANIC SLUTS here. What in tarnation isn't there to like? But yeah his drawings look like doodles on acid. That and the fact he just might be factoring primes with his javascript sort of pushes the whole dealie deal into Blinkyton.
posted by undule at 7:24 PM on April 11, 2006

tellurian, is there any more background you can provide on the artist, past the photographic samples and the website that m_b viewed source on? Might be good to give a little more context, since so far I'm only getting an artist with a penchant for darker styles pulling down his galleries because of frustration or abuse or something along those lines...
posted by VulcanMike at 7:25 PM on April 11, 2006

Solved it.
posted by Astro Zombie at 7:33 PM on April 11, 2006

I liked the linked photos, they didn't look satanic so much as hot and naked. He's an artist, they seem to be prone to strange behaviour.

But I really like the idea of putting your message in your source rather than on the page. So tricky!
posted by fenriq at 8:55 PM on April 11, 2006

Sometimes obscurity is well deserved.
posted by bim at 3:41 AM on April 12, 2006

But I really like the idea of putting your message in your source rather than on the page. So tricky!

There was a a fad among webloggers a few years ago for commenting out extra content so you had to view source to read it, wasn't there? Started on a certain prominent UK weblogger's site (won't say which one as I have no idea if he still does it or if it's still meant to be a bit 'secret').

I rather like the drawings, but suspect the problems with getting his photos displayed might have had more to do with their mediocrity than problems of 'being misunderstood by the public'.
posted by jack_mo at 5:03 AM on April 12, 2006

There was a a fad among webloggers a few years ago for commenting out extra content so you had to view source to read it, wasn't there?

That long predates weblogs.
posted by mendel at 7:25 AM on April 12, 2006