This painting is part of a series I did while in grad school. It was a large body of work called "The Dogma of Dogmen."

In one way it was about this crazy imaginative narrative I constructed in my head about a race of Dogmen who were living under ground biding their time until man destroyed himself, as he inevitably would.

After World War III when all the humans have been eradicated from the world the Dogmen make their way to the topsoil to claim their bounty and begin life anew utilizing all of the resources left behind by man. Unfortunately they are a brutally tyrannical society so it's kinda like man inhabiting the earth all over again!

In another way it is an allegory of the Dogma of art school. I guess I am an artist who believes in the work and gets irritated when the most important thing is a never ending, run me around in circles, let's try and look the smartest or most clever, bullshit, critical conversation. "It's ephemeral...Is it in or at? Your work is arbitrary...blah, blah fucking blah."

Is it any good? Do you have any kind of experience or emotion when you look at it? Does it mean something to you? Do you like the way it looks aesthetically or hate the way it looks? I'm a little more interested in these questions.

Don't get me wrong being able to discuss art critically is a very powerful tool and an important asset to have as an artist, but sitting there in the pack where we are all trained to use the same bull-shit speak sometimes I want to scream out shut the fuck up and make some good work!