Michel Luc Bellemare’s Practical Philosophy
By Mike Levin
It’s scary how the meanings of words can change during one’s own lifetime.
In 1985, the generally accepted antonym of “academic” was “unscholarly.” Today its opposite is “practical”. Which of course means that schooling, apparently, has lost much of its real-world value. This should frighten all of us, not just teachers.
Michel Bellemare:communicating honesty. Photo by Mike Levin.
I love to run into people who turn accepted wisdom on its head, however unintentionally. It happened most recently last week when I met Michel Luc Bellemare, whom I was drawn to because of the Artistic First he’d achieved in Ottawa – but more on that later.
When I did some online background checking on Bellemare, I felt this soft gauze of academia descend over my eyes. He’d spent most of his life in school, right up to the PhD in philosophy with a focus on visual-art communication at Carleton University.
He’d also written three books, the least esoteric of which – The Machine – “probes and outlines the basis of thought and eXistenZ, bring(ing) philosophy to its ultimate conclusion via the unification of Wittgenstein’s philosophy under 1 mantra entitled [The Machine], and in the process refining Hegelianism and Aristotlism to a new fundamental nexus.”
When we met for coffee, I expected a blanched-out heteroclite with an ego the size of Hull, perhaps with flecks of dried spittle at the edges of his mouth. What I got was a normal-looking dude who loved art, was smart and told me at one time he had played goalie for the Major Junior Oshawa Generals hockey team.
His research during many years at university was pretty weird: the history of the avant garde, art’s influence on politics and colour as an element of cultural determinism. But he was also making a living painting in a self-defined style called Colour-Realism – thick layering of paint and glitter.
I can’t say I understood his work, but I never question the warp and woof of an artist who sells. As we talked, Bellemare erased the barrier between academic and practical.
He makes a living because he cultivates and keeps in close contact with people who have bought his work before. One of his books is part of the collection at the National Gallery of Canada because a former school mate is a curator there. And for the first time in this city, Bellemare has booked an entire year of Starbucks walls for his paintings.
He achieved the latter by going to meet the manager of every Starbucks outlet in town and asking to arrange a show. He’s showing at the branch at South Keys into February and then moves to one on Elgin Street near Gilmour. The Glebe is booked, and others will fall into place.
This is practical application at its purest. Bellemare sold his first painting at a coffee shop in Peterborough while at Trent University. He says he’s only a bit pushy, but mostly pragmatic. And his only secret lies in communicating honesty.
“How does an artist get through all the white noise (of today’s market culture)? A big part of it is about getting people interested and supportive in what you are doing, cultivating relationships. But you have to be truly excited about what you are doing to make it all work.”
I get the sense that Bellemare feels many of today’s artists focus only on the pleasurable parts of being creative, the fun stuff that comes naturally and makes others go “Wow, that’s so cool.’ Artists need to get over themselves a bit, to see that if they really view what they’re doing as vital, then all the un-fun stuff becomes vital as well.
“Showing at Starbucks is not dumbing down, it’s taking advantage of the space. Any artists should take advantage of any space. It shouldn’t be intimidating, it should be exciting. Starbucks is just about being co-ordinated.”
Don’t you feel like an idiot now that the Ottawa Citizen has revealed that everything about Bellemare is false. A total liar and fraud, there’s a sucker born everyday. I feel sorry for the well-intentioned Gallery owners that were sucked in since it shows how goofy the art business is.
I think the commenter above needs to reflect a little further on the nature of Michel’s work. I find it hard to believe the term “fraud” applies here on any level. Is the value of art seriously measurable by the wall space at Starbucks? How can art be transgressive if it’s judged by such petty and moralistic standards? The only risk Michel took was with his own reputation. I think it took incredible courage on his part.
…and yes, I could be Michel. I’m not. But I could be. Decide for yourself and figure out what it means.
Thanks for this thoughtful reply. The issue is defined far too hyperbolically, making Bellemare out to be some sort of criminal. I agree that shades of grey tend to scare people.
Well, I should comment on the piece, which I took to be sensationalistic yellow journalism. First and foremost, Mr. Singer did not want to meet with me to discuss the in and outs. Here are some hard facts that Mr. Singer bent himself.
1. I do hold a Ph.D. but since I had spent time at Carleton I thought for translation purposes I would just go with Carleton. Its slicker.
2. Never did I say ” I was a genius”, that was a mis quote on Mr. Singer’s part.
3. I am not married but recently engaged.
4. I am not actually banned from Ottawa start as I do have many other accounts with the site that are still operational. No one can really ever get banned from anything on the net.
5. Yes, I have artwork in the national gallery of canada, the article states that clearly, A book. And I have two artefacts in there as well. You see, major galleries have a policy that they cannot get rid of artwork no matter what. So an artist these days needs only to send a curator an artefact without a return address and it automatically goes into the vault as it is policy. That is policy smarts. So I did this with all the major canadian museums. So I do in all accounts have artwork in every museum I state on my C.V.
6. Who exactly did I defraud? This is certainly not a conrad black or bernie madeoff affair. I simply made people think about what art is? and what are its possibilities? If I have a point to my art it is 1. to create great f’n art by any means necessary. 2. To turn power back to the artist from curators that have to much say in what is considered art and/or great art for that matter, i.e. what is a museum object, is determined by the art itself. And my art makes a legitimate claim to this.
7. Yves Klein manipulated his C.V. for years in france and england to gain entry in museums and galleries. As well, 90% of the articles on me are factual, outlining my philosophy of color and abstract art. The fact that the citizen deleted roughly 5 years work or mostly authentic work is in my estimation a gross exageration. And yes, this has been going on for more than a year and half, roughly 5 to 6 years.
8. If my art is so boring why did Mr. Singer write so much about it, why did he go to such great lengths to expose to study it and get commentaries. Why did it make him burn inside that he had uphold citizen standards in contrast to me. Make no mistakes this was a bias article, yellow in nature, on the journalist part, in part to uphold citizen values.
9. This is a david and goliath story, and the ottawa citizen goliath got it right between the eyes in the name of great art.
Sincerely;
Michel Luc Bellemare Ph.D.
Leave your response!
Search