Title - PendulumDimensions - 30x40x1.5
Media - oil on canvas
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
....
Taking a break. Exhaustive back and forth with a new mistress. No. I'm not cheating on my husband. Just a 30x40 oil sopped frenzied toil on my easel, tucked away, but not far away, in my studio at the other end of the house. It's probably only momentary, but I felt the need to step away and write for a moment. Though Type O Negative just came on the mp3 player and I paint pretty damn productively to Wolf Moon....
Be right back. I'm not done here.
Be right back. I'm not done here.
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
The motives of an abstract artist
I heard the statement below uttered once amongst a forum of artists that truly shocked me....
"Art started as a history, a way to record the past! not, Ohhh! look at what the poor, depressed artist splattered on the canvas, then came up with an explanation for!"
Unfortunately, I believe this to be a sad social commentary on the general atmosphere that seems to surround the abstract artist.
It is true that there are artists who embrace abstraction purely for its markettability...but their dollar driven choices do not speak for all who choose to express themselves through abstraction, just as I do not expect a predominantly realist artist to even begin to attempt to speak for my motives as a painter of the abstract.
The sort of archaic way of thinking quoted above is the same sort of thinking that led the Impressionists of the 19th century to break away from the academically realist French Salon and create their own venue in which to be seen and hopefully, finally be taken seriously as creative forces with ideas and messages to convey - no less important than their realist counterparts. From this spark ignited an art for art sake revolution, leading us through Pollacks overly analyzed drip paintings at its height. Just why is it so incredible that more than one person might find paint splattered onto a canvas purely about the medium with which it was created fascinating in an early 20th century America and beyond? Is it more incredible that people would continue to piggyback off of an idea, be it splatter paintings, clothing styles - or if we really get philosophical - just about any idea or advance in an infinately evolving society? Furthermore, would it really be so amazing to consider the possibility that when an artist like Pollack has an explanation for his work, he might not be speaking out of his ass?
Could it be that when Joseph Albers painted his "Homage to the Square" series of minimalist, smooth, precise blocks of color, he really did want to "proclaim color autonomy as a means of plastic organization"? Or is it truly so incredulous to wrap ones mind around the thought that Albers had a vision and wished to convey it through large colored squares reminiscient of giant post it notes?
What about Chris Ofili's contemporary works, utilizing elephant dung? Is it outrageous to think that his fecal smeared portrayal of the Virgin Mary was a sarcastic commentary rather than an elaborately composed creation made to shock and dismay, lacking substance and meaning? What about the possibility that Ofili's driving force as exhibited through his use of elephant dung, racist symbolizm, pop icons, and the typical African American stereotype, is really meant to denounce the black stereotype in society? Or could it be possible that he looks to celebrate cultural differences through sarcastic and ironic works, all perpetuated by a Nigerian born artist living in a predominantly white UK? If we know the background of some of the choices made, does it change anything?
I am not laying these questions all out to confuse but to consider - I have my own thoughts and individual answers for each inquiry. Generalizing based on assumption or ignorance is a crime committed throughout time for when faced with confusion we as a species like to fit it into a little box and set it aside, rarely taking the time to open the box back up and consider the possibilities within. And I suspect as technology advances and life gets easier, even automated, the box will fill more and more with elements of life we believe to be trivial and too time consuming to understand. I believe that is where the abstract artist shines the brightest as we have the unique opportunity to unlock the box and create work based on our understanding of the elements long forgotten. It is through this constant sifting, creating, and presenting to the public a new perspective that we hand the keys to the box over to the viewer, even if it is just for a minute or two....
"Art started as a history, a way to record the past! not, Ohhh! look at what the poor, depressed artist splattered on the canvas, then came up with an explanation for!"
Unfortunately, I believe this to be a sad social commentary on the general atmosphere that seems to surround the abstract artist.
It is true that there are artists who embrace abstraction purely for its markettability...but their dollar driven choices do not speak for all who choose to express themselves through abstraction, just as I do not expect a predominantly realist artist to even begin to attempt to speak for my motives as a painter of the abstract.
The sort of archaic way of thinking quoted above is the same sort of thinking that led the Impressionists of the 19th century to break away from the academically realist French Salon and create their own venue in which to be seen and hopefully, finally be taken seriously as creative forces with ideas and messages to convey - no less important than their realist counterparts. From this spark ignited an art for art sake revolution, leading us through Pollacks overly analyzed drip paintings at its height. Just why is it so incredible that more than one person might find paint splattered onto a canvas purely about the medium with which it was created fascinating in an early 20th century America and beyond? Is it more incredible that people would continue to piggyback off of an idea, be it splatter paintings, clothing styles - or if we really get philosophical - just about any idea or advance in an infinately evolving society? Furthermore, would it really be so amazing to consider the possibility that when an artist like Pollack has an explanation for his work, he might not be speaking out of his ass?
Could it be that when Joseph Albers painted his "Homage to the Square" series of minimalist, smooth, precise blocks of color, he really did want to "proclaim color autonomy as a means of plastic organization"? Or is it truly so incredulous to wrap ones mind around the thought that Albers had a vision and wished to convey it through large colored squares reminiscient of giant post it notes?
What about Chris Ofili's contemporary works, utilizing elephant dung? Is it outrageous to think that his fecal smeared portrayal of the Virgin Mary was a sarcastic commentary rather than an elaborately composed creation made to shock and dismay, lacking substance and meaning? What about the possibility that Ofili's driving force as exhibited through his use of elephant dung, racist symbolizm, pop icons, and the typical African American stereotype, is really meant to denounce the black stereotype in society? Or could it be possible that he looks to celebrate cultural differences through sarcastic and ironic works, all perpetuated by a Nigerian born artist living in a predominantly white UK? If we know the background of some of the choices made, does it change anything?
I am not laying these questions all out to confuse but to consider - I have my own thoughts and individual answers for each inquiry. Generalizing based on assumption or ignorance is a crime committed throughout time for when faced with confusion we as a species like to fit it into a little box and set it aside, rarely taking the time to open the box back up and consider the possibilities within. And I suspect as technology advances and life gets easier, even automated, the box will fill more and more with elements of life we believe to be trivial and too time consuming to understand. I believe that is where the abstract artist shines the brightest as we have the unique opportunity to unlock the box and create work based on our understanding of the elements long forgotten. It is through this constant sifting, creating, and presenting to the public a new perspective that we hand the keys to the box over to the viewer, even if it is just for a minute or two....
Monday, July 23, 2007
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Featured on DeviantART!
My painting, "Glow" was featured as a daily deviation on the DeviantART homepage on the 19th! Course, I didn't see it until today! Been so busy with commissions and such that I hadn't been on dA in about a week or so when I signed on to order some prints for a few customers and found 200 - some odd messages about my being featured :)
Awesome! So thanks, jesusIV for the feature! Truth be told, you rock socks too :)
BTW, as an aside, I am offering prints of that piece in a variety of sizes! I'll be listing them in my Etsy shop in the coming days.
Woo!
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Artella Daily Muse interview!
Today I am the featured artist at the creative web magazine Artella Daily Muse for their "In the Studio" section of the site. Below is a copy of the interview :)
Daily Muse: How would you describe your art?
Aja: How I would describe my art would simply be 'abstract impressionist'.
DM: Tell us more...
Aja: How others would, and have described the majority of my work would be 'Wow -- those are naked chicks, aren't they?'
DM: What is your favorite piece of your own art? Why?
Aja: Right now it is my newest piece, “Glow”, and it's nice when that happens. I can name a handful of pieces that made me go, “Wow, did I really paint that?” and those pieces raise the bar for me. It's a need at that point to shock myself even more. It's then that you know you are on the right path.
DM: What people, places, or things inspire you most?
Aja: I am inspired by all around me but have an affinity for the Abstract Expressionists such as Rothko, de Kooning, and more contemporary examples such as Susan Rothenburg and Cecily Brown. Selling in such venues as eBay and Etsy has opened me up to a treasure trove of inspiration.
DM: How do you organize your art supplies?
Aja: I am not familiar with that word, organize. Sounds like something I should look into, haha....
DM: What art supply can you not live without?
Aja: My palette knife, oil paint, and canvas. They go hand and hand. I lost my palette knife once and nearly cried as I tore apart my studio looking for it. Tell me more about organization?
DM: What favorite book(s) can you recommend?
Aja: A compilation of contemporary painters called Vitamin P. I purchased it while at the Whitney in NYC, and it has become my handbook of sorts. Someone somewhere said painting was dead. This book has hundreds of pages of examples to the contrary.
DM: What is your favorite charity, volunteer interest, or cause?
Aja: Diabetes. Really. My grandmother, grandfather, great aunt, and best friend's mom all died of it. Now my mom has it. So, when I can, I donate to the American Diabetes Association or related organizations. I also recently donated a painting to the Seneca Falls Historical Society Charity Ball – my great-grandmother is heavily involved, and I am happy to contribute.
DM: What movie(s) do you consider your favorite(s)?
Aja: I love the ones that make you think, or challenge you somehow. “Donnie Darko”, “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas”, “Memento”, “Requiem for a Dream” -- they all challenge your mind and make you consider something you might not have considered previously. I also must throw in Grind House flicks. I watch them regularly on IFC – they are like visual crack.
DM: What music do you love to hear while you’re creating?
Aja: Oh, that so depends. I love my hardcore and metal, truth be told. Type O Negative, Opeth, and a now defunct local band from upstate NY called Section 8 are all faves of mine. I also love classic rock. Pink Floyd's work is some of the best music ever created.
DM: What is your favorite quote?
Aja: Honestly, I am not “in the know” really when it comes to quotes. Half of me wanted to Google something witty... but then that would be cheating. I'm more of a lyrics kind of chick. It's so hard to think of something like that when music is blaring in your ears...
Maybe... "Do or do not... there is no try." I think Yoda said that, didn't he? I am such a dork.
DM: Who is, or has been, your mentor, favorite teacher, or favorite artist?
Aja: Easy. Thorpe Feidt of Montserrat College of Art. He is the stuff of freshman legend. The professor with little patience for the half-assed art student looking for an easy career doodling on tablets all day, like so many parents are afraid of. The cliché. He has challenged each and every student that has ever crossed his path – told me the first time I had a review class with him that my work was too contrived, and I got into a 20 minute debate with him on just why I felt he was out of line – even though he was absolutely right. He is the reason I am the artist I am. Even now I look at my work sometimes and go, “Thorpe would kick me right now... this looks to comfy.” He taught me to paint, even though I thought I already knew.
DM: What is your number one tip for budding artists?
Aja: Don't second guess yourself. Did you know Matisse literally had hundreds of scrapped canvases sitting in storage rooms to remind him of what not to do? But he painted them anyways, and then kept them. He never stopped to go, “Wow, that sucks, I am so done with this, and I will never be the artist I wish to be.” Now that's persistence and devotion to one's craft. Let your vision guide you, and don't betray it, not even for a second. It will haunt you.
DM: What favorite “quickie recipe” for creating a piece would you like to share?
Aja: Canvas goes on the easel; paint on the palette, palette knife mixes gobs of undiluted color and dances across the canvas without a second thought. It's best to consider the whole in one's mind's eye instead of obsessing so over the parts. It's when I obsess that my work takes on a stifled, stuffy appearance. I know it. The viewer knows it. And generally those pieces are the bane of my existence. Those pieces become other pieces. And those pieces are rarely seen. Not because they are rare – but because I demand more. Abstract artist as perfectionist – the oxymoron?
DM: What suggestions can you offer for moving through creative “blocks”?
Aja: For me, it's loud music and stepping away from the studio completely. Writing. Right this very moment, I have a 16 x 20 inch canvas that I keep eyeing through typed words, contemplations on the questions laid out here, and headphones at max volume blaring Opeth's “Bleak” into my ears... frantically chain smoking and considering the possibilities of the blankness before me both in word document and primed canvas. It will become something. I've thought too much about it. It's why I am here. Stop thinking. Just do. If it's mud, it's mud. There is nothing worse than a blank canvas at that point, because you have no excuse except perhaps for the fear of failure. Think of the possibilities instead of the ramifications. Even ramifications can be beautiful sometimes...
DM: What do you do for rest and relaxation?
Aja: Rest and relaxation is all relative. Sometimes I work to relax. Sometimes I scratch it all and drink the night away to relax, only to realize my mind is on the painting sitting on the easel. It can be a bit torturous at times, the things I put myself through. The things paintings put me through. Not to say my work is torture, not at all – or I wouldn't do it. It's self-exploration and self-sustainment. This can be exhausting and relaxing at the same time. Goodness... now I'm confused.
I have a four year old, on top of it all, who keeps me going. I guess what I do for rest is sleep. Moms never rest, and an artist's mind is always at work. It's nuts.
DM: If you could go back in time and have lunch with anyone, who would you chose?
Aja: Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec – he hung out in Parisian dives all day painting can-can divas, liquored up and void of any pretentiousness so affiliated with the perception of the serious “artiste”. An afternoon with him would be an afternoon in psychological surreality with an artistic demi-god who never saw himself as such. Fantastic, if you ask me.
Daily Muse: How would you describe your art?Aja: How I would describe my art would simply be 'abstract impressionist'.
DM: Tell us more...
Aja: How others would, and have described the majority of my work would be 'Wow -- those are naked chicks, aren't they?'
DM: What is your favorite piece of your own art? Why?
Aja: Right now it is my newest piece, “Glow”, and it's nice when that happens. I can name a handful of pieces that made me go, “Wow, did I really paint that?” and those pieces raise the bar for me. It's a need at that point to shock myself even more. It's then that you know you are on the right path.
DM: What people, places, or things inspire you most?
Aja: I am inspired by all around me but have an affinity for the Abstract Expressionists such as Rothko, de Kooning, and more contemporary examples such as Susan Rothenburg and Cecily Brown. Selling in such venues as eBay and Etsy has opened me up to a treasure trove of inspiration.
DM: How do you organize your art supplies?
Aja: I am not familiar with that word, organize. Sounds like something I should look into, haha....
DM: What art supply can you not live without?Aja: My palette knife, oil paint, and canvas. They go hand and hand. I lost my palette knife once and nearly cried as I tore apart my studio looking for it. Tell me more about organization?
DM: What favorite book(s) can you recommend?
Aja: A compilation of contemporary painters called Vitamin P. I purchased it while at the Whitney in NYC, and it has become my handbook of sorts. Someone somewhere said painting was dead. This book has hundreds of pages of examples to the contrary.
DM: What is your favorite charity, volunteer interest, or cause?
Aja: Diabetes. Really. My grandmother, grandfather, great aunt, and best friend's mom all died of it. Now my mom has it. So, when I can, I donate to the American Diabetes Association or related organizations. I also recently donated a painting to the Seneca Falls Historical Society Charity Ball – my great-grandmother is heavily involved, and I am happy to contribute.
DM: What movie(s) do you consider your favorite(s)?Aja: I love the ones that make you think, or challenge you somehow. “Donnie Darko”, “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas”, “Memento”, “Requiem for a Dream” -- they all challenge your mind and make you consider something you might not have considered previously. I also must throw in Grind House flicks. I watch them regularly on IFC – they are like visual crack.
DM: What music do you love to hear while you’re creating?
Aja: Oh, that so depends. I love my hardcore and metal, truth be told. Type O Negative, Opeth, and a now defunct local band from upstate NY called Section 8 are all faves of mine. I also love classic rock. Pink Floyd's work is some of the best music ever created.
DM: What is your favorite quote?
Aja: Honestly, I am not “in the know” really when it comes to quotes. Half of me wanted to Google something witty... but then that would be cheating. I'm more of a lyrics kind of chick. It's so hard to think of something like that when music is blaring in your ears...
Maybe... "Do or do not... there is no try." I think Yoda said that, didn't he? I am such a dork.
DM: Who is, or has been, your mentor, favorite teacher, or favorite artist?Aja: Easy. Thorpe Feidt of Montserrat College of Art. He is the stuff of freshman legend. The professor with little patience for the half-assed art student looking for an easy career doodling on tablets all day, like so many parents are afraid of. The cliché. He has challenged each and every student that has ever crossed his path – told me the first time I had a review class with him that my work was too contrived, and I got into a 20 minute debate with him on just why I felt he was out of line – even though he was absolutely right. He is the reason I am the artist I am. Even now I look at my work sometimes and go, “Thorpe would kick me right now... this looks to comfy.” He taught me to paint, even though I thought I already knew.
DM: What is your number one tip for budding artists?
Aja: Don't second guess yourself. Did you know Matisse literally had hundreds of scrapped canvases sitting in storage rooms to remind him of what not to do? But he painted them anyways, and then kept them. He never stopped to go, “Wow, that sucks, I am so done with this, and I will never be the artist I wish to be.” Now that's persistence and devotion to one's craft. Let your vision guide you, and don't betray it, not even for a second. It will haunt you.
DM: What favorite “quickie recipe” for creating a piece would you like to share?
Aja: Canvas goes on the easel; paint on the palette, palette knife mixes gobs of undiluted color and dances across the canvas without a second thought. It's best to consider the whole in one's mind's eye instead of obsessing so over the parts. It's when I obsess that my work takes on a stifled, stuffy appearance. I know it. The viewer knows it. And generally those pieces are the bane of my existence. Those pieces become other pieces. And those pieces are rarely seen. Not because they are rare – but because I demand more. Abstract artist as perfectionist – the oxymoron?
DM: What suggestions can you offer for moving through creative “blocks”?
Aja: For me, it's loud music and stepping away from the studio completely. Writing. Right this very moment, I have a 16 x 20 inch canvas that I keep eyeing through typed words, contemplations on the questions laid out here, and headphones at max volume blaring Opeth's “Bleak” into my ears... frantically chain smoking and considering the possibilities of the blankness before me both in word document and primed canvas. It will become something. I've thought too much about it. It's why I am here. Stop thinking. Just do. If it's mud, it's mud. There is nothing worse than a blank canvas at that point, because you have no excuse except perhaps for the fear of failure. Think of the possibilities instead of the ramifications. Even ramifications can be beautiful sometimes...
DM: What do you do for rest and relaxation?
Aja: Rest and relaxation is all relative. Sometimes I work to relax. Sometimes I scratch it all and drink the night away to relax, only to realize my mind is on the painting sitting on the easel. It can be a bit torturous at times, the things I put myself through. The things paintings put me through. Not to say my work is torture, not at all – or I wouldn't do it. It's self-exploration and self-sustainment. This can be exhausting and relaxing at the same time. Goodness... now I'm confused.
I have a four year old, on top of it all, who keeps me going. I guess what I do for rest is sleep. Moms never rest, and an artist's mind is always at work. It's nuts.
DM: If you could go back in time and have lunch with anyone, who would you chose?
Aja: Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec – he hung out in Parisian dives all day painting can-can divas, liquored up and void of any pretentiousness so affiliated with the perception of the serious “artiste”. An afternoon with him would be an afternoon in psychological surreality with an artistic demi-god who never saw himself as such. Fantastic, if you ask me.
Saturday, June 9, 2007
Individuality - the "originality" issue in art confronted
Originality. Not derived from something else; fresh and unusual...short and sweet in its definition if reducing reality to black and white is a comfortable practice.
The question and debate surrounding originality is as much a focus in the creation of art as the artists exploration for their creative voice. This is a truism particularly in the ultra competitive atmosphere of online auction venues such as eBay. Yet as subjective and complicated an idea, some have taken it upon themselves to single handedly tackle the abstract concept of “wholly original” art, deeming theirs the only truly “original” work available in their chosen style. These artists not only preach their originality, but attempt to police it through the formation of elitist “clubs”, email intimidation of artists whom they believe haven’t been innocently inspired by them but are actively attempting to copy their styles, colors, or subject matter in order to simply sell their wares, and make libelous public statements regarding those artists.
I have been both fascinated and disgusted by the course of events inspired by the issue of originality in art as of late. The delusional notion that Contemporary artwork can be entirely original free from elements derived from artistic influences from the field’s predecessors is a rather arrogant notion at best. Unless an artist lives the secluded life of a hermit in a cardboard box of sorts, free from media or educational guidance, it is virtually impossible to emulate the very definition of “original” through the creation of a work of art. Through a bevy of movements and the masters who forged the paths through the great artistic revolution from academic realism to art for arts sake, inspiration has inevitably trickled down from the first cave drawings to the modern day artist in the search for an individual voice of expression. This unavoidable chain of influence is purely human in its existence, as it is our nature to retain inspiration in the conscious or even subconscious where it may resurface without preconception or coaxing in the evolution of society.
So, it becomes not the question of “originality”, but “individuality” after all things considered.
So just who is qualified enough (if anyone could be qualified in such an area of subjective considerations) to differentiate between originality and individuality in something as ambiguous as an artistic creation? Some may believe they have the authority to make such judgment calls, but it all really boils down to personal opinion and little more.
Artistic “essence” and vision can not be duplicated, even when “copied”. There will always be the residual artistic fingerprint in the finished piece. Unless replicated artificially through technical means, an artist can not single handedly undermine the artistic integrity of another through inspiration and the creation of a work of art considered to be “derived” from another. No one can steal the essence of another anymore than they can steal their soul. If that was the truth then may the art gods smite me for believing otherwise as I am quite confident that no one could duplicate my emotions, visions, and artistic voice -- even if they were to reproduce my work to match it. There is just no way - I refuse to believe it. If I did then I would have to stop creating because I would know my voice was no longer apparent, or unique. There is a difference between having a sincere emotional response to the world using ones personal artistic voice and instincts and the rip off that strives to have the passion of the latter.
And so...the debate ventures forth into the future as this question will not be answered in our time if at all, destined to become more complicated and heated in its delivery and reception as time progresses and artists come and go. “Originality” as an issue in the art sellers market is nothing more than an advertisement tempting the viewer with catch phrases and buzz words playing on implications and semantics. But the conceited marketing geniuses behind the incessant tooting of their own original horns don’t want the general art buying and collecting public to know this...
Or they might be out a slogan.
The question and debate surrounding originality is as much a focus in the creation of art as the artists exploration for their creative voice. This is a truism particularly in the ultra competitive atmosphere of online auction venues such as eBay. Yet as subjective and complicated an idea, some have taken it upon themselves to single handedly tackle the abstract concept of “wholly original” art, deeming theirs the only truly “original” work available in their chosen style. These artists not only preach their originality, but attempt to police it through the formation of elitist “clubs”, email intimidation of artists whom they believe haven’t been innocently inspired by them but are actively attempting to copy their styles, colors, or subject matter in order to simply sell their wares, and make libelous public statements regarding those artists.
I have been both fascinated and disgusted by the course of events inspired by the issue of originality in art as of late. The delusional notion that Contemporary artwork can be entirely original free from elements derived from artistic influences from the field’s predecessors is a rather arrogant notion at best. Unless an artist lives the secluded life of a hermit in a cardboard box of sorts, free from media or educational guidance, it is virtually impossible to emulate the very definition of “original” through the creation of a work of art. Through a bevy of movements and the masters who forged the paths through the great artistic revolution from academic realism to art for arts sake, inspiration has inevitably trickled down from the first cave drawings to the modern day artist in the search for an individual voice of expression. This unavoidable chain of influence is purely human in its existence, as it is our nature to retain inspiration in the conscious or even subconscious where it may resurface without preconception or coaxing in the evolution of society.
So, it becomes not the question of “originality”, but “individuality” after all things considered.
So just who is qualified enough (if anyone could be qualified in such an area of subjective considerations) to differentiate between originality and individuality in something as ambiguous as an artistic creation? Some may believe they have the authority to make such judgment calls, but it all really boils down to personal opinion and little more.
Artistic “essence” and vision can not be duplicated, even when “copied”. There will always be the residual artistic fingerprint in the finished piece. Unless replicated artificially through technical means, an artist can not single handedly undermine the artistic integrity of another through inspiration and the creation of a work of art considered to be “derived” from another. No one can steal the essence of another anymore than they can steal their soul. If that was the truth then may the art gods smite me for believing otherwise as I am quite confident that no one could duplicate my emotions, visions, and artistic voice -- even if they were to reproduce my work to match it. There is just no way - I refuse to believe it. If I did then I would have to stop creating because I would know my voice was no longer apparent, or unique. There is a difference between having a sincere emotional response to the world using ones personal artistic voice and instincts and the rip off that strives to have the passion of the latter.
And so...the debate ventures forth into the future as this question will not be answered in our time if at all, destined to become more complicated and heated in its delivery and reception as time progresses and artists come and go. “Originality” as an issue in the art sellers market is nothing more than an advertisement tempting the viewer with catch phrases and buzz words playing on implications and semantics. But the conceited marketing geniuses behind the incessant tooting of their own original horns don’t want the general art buying and collecting public to know this...
Or they might be out a slogan.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Semi-homemade Baked Beans. Yum.
Semi-homemade baked beans by sagittariusgallery :)So last night, much to the other half's delight, I made my baked beans. They're wicked easy and really good. Eat at your own risk they are artery clogging, methane inducing delicious ;)
Simple Ingredients -
1 28oz can Bush's Boston Style Baked Beans
1 16oz can Bush's Country Style Baked Beans
1 package center cut bacon
molasses
tobasco sauce
onion powder
garlic powder
black pepper
Simple preparation -
Fry entire package of bacon on stovetop until crisp and allow to cool on paper towels and reserve a small amount of bacon fat (probably the amount of liquid fat from 4 slices of bacon).
While bacon fries...
Turn oven onto 375 degrees.
Empty beans into 8x8 caserole dish. Sprinkle 7-8 liberal shakes of tobasco sauce, drizzle a tablespoon of molasses, and skake a very fine layer of garlic powder and onion powder over beans. Stir together. Mix in bacon fat. Break up 3 strips of bacon and mix in as well.
Cut up the rest of the bacon into 1 inch strips with scissors so they don't crumble apart. Make a bed of bacon over beans. Sprinkle more onion powder, garlic powder, and black pepper lightly over bacon and drizzle with thin ribbons of molasses.
Place in oven and bake for 30 minutes. Let stand for 5 after pulling beans out for sauce to thicken a bit.
Enjoy :) It's so bad for you but so yummy.
Simple Ingredients -
1 28oz can Bush's Boston Style Baked Beans
1 16oz can Bush's Country Style Baked Beans
1 package center cut bacon
molasses
tobasco sauce
onion powder
garlic powder
black pepper
Simple preparation -
Fry entire package of bacon on stovetop until crisp and allow to cool on paper towels and reserve a small amount of bacon fat (probably the amount of liquid fat from 4 slices of bacon).
While bacon fries...
Turn oven onto 375 degrees.
Empty beans into 8x8 caserole dish. Sprinkle 7-8 liberal shakes of tobasco sauce, drizzle a tablespoon of molasses, and skake a very fine layer of garlic powder and onion powder over beans. Stir together. Mix in bacon fat. Break up 3 strips of bacon and mix in as well.
Cut up the rest of the bacon into 1 inch strips with scissors so they don't crumble apart. Make a bed of bacon over beans. Sprinkle more onion powder, garlic powder, and black pepper lightly over bacon and drizzle with thin ribbons of molasses.
Place in oven and bake for 30 minutes. Let stand for 5 after pulling beans out for sauce to thicken a bit.
Enjoy :) It's so bad for you but so yummy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
