All Posts in contemporary art

- No Comments!

Please Wipe Your Shoes Before Walking on Michelle Alexander

Michelle Alexander on Reclaiming the Body Through Art 

Michelle Alexander, Split Self, 2021, digital image on paper

Chicago-based artist Michelle Alexander is not afraid to make you uncomfortable—especially if you’re standing on her nipple. In this conversation, Alexander and I discuss everything from her recent exhibition My Body/Your Object, which featured carpet-sized images of her skin that viewers could walk on, to how her fashion background helped shape her craft now. Whether talking about curating shows or the highly personal works of Félix González-Torres, Alexander’s interest in the body—as something consumable, shared between people, soft yet unruly—leaks into every word. There's no shortage of artists' work about the body, but, given that our animal selves are the source of all experience, the body—as Alexander proves—will never be dull material.

— Mieke Marple

Mieke Marple: In your most recent exhibition My Body/Your Object at Mathew Heberlein Contemporary, you printed out oversized close-ups of your body that visitors could walk on. These close-ups feature skin folds, cropped nipples, and freckles. What was your intention here?

Michelle Alexander: I was trying to create a physical confrontation between the viewer and my body, but not in a voyeuristic way. These images are intimate but not flattering. They’re cropped, zoomed in, and raw. I wanted to remove the typical cues we use to categorize bodies, especially female bodies, and instead show skin as terrain, as surface. Letting people walk on these images raised questions for me about ownership, consumption, power, and awareness. It was less about making a statement and more about offering a moment of discomfort or pause.

Michelle Alexander, Grounding Touch, 2021, digital image on paper and lino print on mylar

MM: Did the way visitors interact with the works surprise you? Were there any differences between what you expected and what actually happened?

MA: Definitely. Some people walked right across the carpets without a second thought. Others hesitated and walked around, or asked if it was okay. That hesitation said a lot to me. Watching people decide how to move through the space revealed something I didn’t fully anticipate: my own dynamic with people-pleasing. It made me wonder if putting myself literally on the floor to be walked on was a way of reclaiming that tendency, of setting new terms for how my body is engaged with. The work became a kind of boundary-setting exercise, even as it appeared boundary-less.

I was also hyper-aware of if and when people even realized they were interacting with the works; drinking it, eating it, holding it, stepping on it. That blur between art and environment was intentional, but it also left me wondering: When does the work become more about them than me? Or is that transfer even possible? I don’t think I have a clear answer yet, but that tension between control and release, between author and audience, has stayed with me.

Michelle Alexander, "My Body/Your Object," 2025, installation view at Mathew Heberlein Contemporary, Chicago IL. Photo credit: Jonas Muller-Ahlheim

MM: I see echoes of Eleanor Antin’s “carving piece” and Marina Abramović's “Rhythm 0” in this piece. What is the artistic legacy that you see yourself a part of?

MA: Wow, that is so flattering to be talked about in conversation with those incredible artists and those works that feel both surreal and deeply meaningful. I definitely look to artists who use their bodies as material, especially women who use their bodies as a canvas in ways that are surprising, uncomfortable, and complicated. That legacy matters to me not in terms of notoriety or performance, but in how those artists create space for bodies that don’t behave or perform in socially acceptable ways. My work is part of that lineage, but it’s also grounded in installation and material manipulation. I’m interested in what the body leaves behind: impressions, fragments, traces. It’s less about performing the body in real time and more about making its presence felt after the fact, what lingers, what’s carried, what’s been touched, changed, or awakened inside you.

MM: You worked as an associate designer at Amur, assistant designer at ML Monique Lhuillier, and an assistant designer at Longstreet, developing garment designs for brands like US Polo Association, Limited Too, Kensie Girl, New Balance Girls, and Nine Threads. How does your background in fashion inform your art practice? Were you always making art or is artmaking something you came to later?

MA: Art and creative expression have always been central to my life. Before studying fashion, I studied painting and photography in undergrad. Making art has always been my best outlet for trying to understand myself and the world around me.

Fashion came later and became my first real education in how bodies are controlled. I learned how silhouettes can be shaped, how garments can seduce or restrict. That had a huge impact on how I think about form. In my artwork now, I still use fabric, structure, and decoration, but I twist them. I make them heavy, raw, awkward, and vulnerable. My relationship to fashion and my body is complicated, and that complexity drives a lot of my practice.

The pressure to be thin, beautiful, put together, or perfect trickles into every part of the fashion machine. That pressure is palpable, and it stays with you. It gets under your skin, into your daily habits, and shapes your sense of self-worth.

While I was always creative, I didn’t come into art seriously until later. It became a way to process everything left behind in me. Through my work, I’m often trying to reclaim the body, to disrupt those systems of control, and to ask new questions about how we define beauty, power, and presence.

portrait of Michelle Alexander

MM: You also recently curated a show “Connective Thread” at Ivory Gate Gallery that included work by Michelle Grabner, Adrianne Rubenstein, and yourself, among others. What made you want to curate this show, and how do you see curating as an extension of your practice?

MA: That show came out of admiration and creating opportunity, honestly. I was a fan of these artists first. I reached out to people I deeply respect, and I was lucky they trusted me enough to say yes. The show was rooted in my own questions about womanhood, softness, and strength. I was looking for work that engaged with the body not just as subject, but as material, as something to be shaped, tested, and transformed.

Curating gave me the chance to create a space where different forms of embodiment could be in conversation. It felt like assembling a shared nervous system. The decisions I made were intuitive and personal, completely tied to my own practice. It didn’t feel like a separate role; it felt like an extension of the same questions I ask in my studio.

So much of the time, how and where artists show their work is taken out of our hands. Curating felt like a way to reclaim some of that. To mold the vision, shape the atmosphere, and build a context with intention and make it happen. It gave me the opportunity to expose myself and others to artists I admire and to bring that admiration into a public, collective space.

MM: What are you working on now? And where do you see your work going in the next five years?

MA: I’m working on some new sculptural installation pieces that explore how the body responds to external pressure, especially within male-dominated spaces. I’m experimenting with fragmented forms and possibly integrating sound elements to deepen the physical and emotional impact. I’m still really interested in how environments can hold the weight of a body or push against it and how materials can carry emotional residue.

A lot of my focus continues to be on the complications of being in a body, trying to understand it, and building spaces where viewers can see themselves and feel seen. I want the work to create moments of confrontation but also recognition, especially around the layered and often contradictory experience of being in a female body.

Looking ahead, I hope to push further into immersive installation and maybe start working in more public or site-responsive contexts. I want to continue using materiality to shift emotional landscapes, not just visual ones.

In five years, I hope I’m still making work that is honest, uncomfortable, and generous in its tension, work that opens space for softness, contradiction, and deeper understanding of embodiment, especially within the ongoing messiness of just being.

Michelle Alexander, Flayed, 2022, digital images on organza, charcoal, pins, dressforms

MM: If you could ask a question to any artist, living or dead, who would you choose and what would your question be?

MA: I’d like to talk to Félix González-Torres. I’d ask him how it feels to see people interact with “Untitled” (Portrait of Ross in L.A.), to watch them take candy, eat it, and walk away. How does it feel to see something so heavy handled through sweetness? What does it mean to make grief consumable, to represent a body as a pile of shimmering candy? I’d want to know what candy meant to him in that context, what the sugar, the metallic foil, the act of giving away and disappearing stood for emotionally, politically, personally.

I’d also ask about the role of the viewer, how it feels to have them physically participate in the piece, to complete it, even when they might not fully understand what it’s about. When the work is so deeply personal, how does it feel to have that meaning fragmented by the public? Does it matter if they don’t know the story? Or is that distance part of it, too? I think his ability to hold intimacy and anonymity in the same gesture is incredibly powerful, and I wonder how he carried that tension as an artist and as a person.

To learn more about Michelle, follow her Instagram and visit her website.

Michelle Alexander, Weight of the Ideal, 2024, mixed media

Michelle Alexander, The Pressure, 2025, installation view at Ivory Gate Gallery, Chicago IL.

Michelle Alexander, Pieced Back Together, 2021, mixed media

For more from Mieke:
Miekemarple.com
Instagram
Substack

- No Comments!

Mark Ollinger: Harmonizing Craft and Circumstance

Vancouver’s Mark Ollinger has trudged down the weeds into his own trail. As a sculptor, yeah, but also as an experimenter of mediums, a math head of sorts, a billiard enthusiast, and an advocate for a world of loving acceptance and connection that steers clear from the Canada Council of the Arts’ political agenda. From meeting our very own founder Vic from Gross over a decade ago while illegally installing street sculptures (shhhhh, don’t be a narc), to recently getting a new studio space in New York, Ollinger has always put his path in fate’s hands. We were lucky to be able to peep over the fence into Ollinger's world, exploring the depths of his inspiration, the beautiful mess of juggling a handful of projects, and his vision for the future.

Feeling at Home in the Hustle

Ollinger's creative process is a symphony of controlled chaos. A system for wrangling multiple projects at any given moment. "I tend to work on multiple projects at a time, usually having 4-8 on the go," he shares. But this isn’t a bad habit; Ollinger sees it as a mirror to life's beautiful mess.  "I feel like I have forgotten what it feels like at this point, just a never-ending process like life". 

Connection with craft is deeply personal, having, as he says, "followed the materials back to harvesting the wood myself, starting with a tree trunk and milling the wood into sheets". This intimate involvement with his medium is a hallmark of his artistic journey.   

The Evolution Revolution

Ollinger's journey has been one of constant ebb and flow. "I've been fortunate to find myself constantly evolving with my design and craft abilities," he reflects. He began as a painter, but eventually found his calling in sculpture through pivot moments like figuring out panel work and freestanding design which helped sculpt (pun intended) his whole craft and what the potential of new equipment can spark in the future.  

Ollinger isn’t known to scrap pieces, he’s in it for the ride. “I think I’ve finished 99% of what I’ve started. There’s been a few I’ve never shown and decided to shelve and a couple I’ve destroyed after finishing, but at this point I'm pretty good at visualizing what it'll be like and am almost always happy with how they turn out.” he says. 

Heart of the Work

Ollinger's sculptures aren’t just easy on the eyes; they're visual stories about this carousel of life. "The Apathism idea is an attempt to create an image of the phenomenon of a human life spanning time," he explains. The choice of materials, particularly wood, is deliberate. "With that in mind being the foundation of the work, wood with the rings of the tree being the visual lifespan of the tree, tends to be the best material for the idea in my opinion," Ollinger shares.  

His signature "intersecting lines and undulating shapes," have weight to them. "The weaving of the line over and under itself in different locations of the works are meant to represent circumstances in life both positive and negative occurrences," he elaborates, leaning back on the "karmic balance of life".  

Art for Arts sake

Ollinger sees art as a powerful connector. "Art is the ultimate gap bridger," he asserts. He speaks from personal experience, acknowledging how art has transformed his own life and through his work, Ollinger has connected with people from all over, emphasizing that “it's my honest attempt to see the world objectively and focus on the fundamental structures and make the human experience universal, the things we all have in common are the things we all experience the same. Like gravity and density and other non subjective components of the human experience. It's through my work that I have found empathy and feel connected to the world around me and my fellow human beings.”

But this connection has been feeling somewhat fleeting when it comes to his home in Canada. “I have a whole theory on Canadian art now and the use of Canada Council of the Arts to politicize the vast majority of the art coming from here that the art scene doesn't really like. I see a lot of propaganda in the form of artwork these days and the use of the grant program to influence the politicization of messages about the work.” He explains, “The vast majority of Canadian artists rely on grants up here and I think that has been detrimental. I feel like I'm the only person calling this out. A lot of people feel the same way but are too worried about their career to speak out. It's actually crazy.”

He has a unique parallel of math and art – “all abstract artworks are process based and in order to create a cohesive body of work you must develop a similar process of production, and that brings us into formal systems and the foundations of math.” Ollinger doesn’t “see a line between artistic exploration and scientific inquiry at this point.” To him it’s an equation, “mathematics is the language of nature and everything fundamentally is mathematics”.  

Looking Ahead

Ollinger's journey is far from over. With the new studio space in New York, he’s eager to immerse himself in the city. "I'm planning on working my way down there!" he exclaims. With new materials he’s eyeing, he's ready to "scale up and start working on some larger than life pieces".

Photos by Lia Crowe, courtesy of the artist

- No Comments!

Measures of a Man – Julian Pace Cuts Ego Down to Size with his Larger Than Life Paintings.

Success is defined as achieving the desired goal. A goal to be rich and famous or simply just to wake up another day depending on the individual. But so often we compare the lives and things of others to equate our happiness without realizing they are no more people than the things they have. It's not what you acquire that makes you great and successful. It's what you bring and who you truly are. So if celebrity and luxury are the apexes of success, does that mean our dreams are invalid if we don't want that? No. Truth is, what defines success is a testament to one's values. 

What we value differs from person to person, but with social media being one of the dictating factors of how view the world, some value the opinions of others more than ever. Image is the biggest influence to the point of likes and comments manipulate your whole existence. One can view the lives of others showing a perfect lifestyle, not knowing they worked hard to create this illusion. So if you can look successful, why work hard to be successful? Because much like our heroes or idols, it's the journey and struggles we persevered that define and inspire us.

Julian Pace, a self-taught painter whose ambitions led him from Seattle to New York and now Los Angeles utilizes famous figures and things that attract us to reshape how we view them. His precision in oddly detailing his subjects stands out as a form of alienation in his paintings. The abnormal use of portion, roughness, and stale coloring illustrates that what we are attracted to isn't as perfect as it looks. It's a full embrace of one's character and imperfections assuring us that we all want to achieve something; so appreciate the process more than the product.

Interlude and interview by Ian Randolph

1. In all mediums of art, social media has been a tool to promote an artist's work without the hassle of getting shown in a gallery. It can be lucrative, of course, but when one does it opens them up to a market where there's more competition for exposure, let alone discovering other artists who may have a similar aesthetic. Does that worry you?

JP: No. Not at this point. I think my mindset in terms of social media was never to be "discovered". For me, if I have something to share with the world without knowing about getting into galleries. I used to draw in my sketchbook and just put it out for people to see and to keep myself focused. I drew my whole life and stopped for a moment, so when I got back to it, I used my sketches and posts as a personal quota to keep me going. It kept me more focused. It kept me honest, so if you just put something out into the world, maybe someone will see it. Maybe someone will like it or not.  Luckily someone reached out to me through Instagram to do a residency and this whole new world opened up.

IR: So you're not swayed by any of this? You're self-motivated.

JP: No. I'm inspired by other artists and I'm definitely on social media heavier than I should, but I'm not swayed. I love to see people doing well and see new art because I never went to art school. My art school is just to see the people around me. It's cool to me.

2. The idea of what a celebrity is and how to become one has taken a big shift in recent years due to social media influencers. Do you think art now is more about your personality rather than skill?

JP: Maybe with social media the idea is "They don't buy into your product. They buy into you." Maybe that's true. I'm sure there are plenty of assholes that are successful because of it, but I don't think you can really know someone through social media even if it seems like you can. If you meet someone in person, it's usually different. One time I met someone who came to my studio and said "Wow. I thought you were a serious and stern kind of guy, but you're not that or who I thought you were." I guess because I don't smile in pictures. If you see that, you would think "This guy is a serious something, something," but I don't take myself too seriously.

IR: You just seem more focused. Like "I could be working on some shit right now...Did I leave the oven on?..."

JP: Yeah(laughs)! I mean, I use social media as a tool because it is a powerful tool, so I try to use it and it's a place where you can see what I'm doing.

IR: You're also very particular in what you're doing. You use certain influential icons in some of your works and every artist, athlete, etc. they have their influences.

JP: Somewhat. My work touches on celebrity worship or cult of personality that we build and a lot of times you might see somebody and have one idea, but the reality is they're not that person.

IR: Never meet your heroes.

JP: Yeah. Never meet your heroes(laughs). And maybe there's no such thing and you shouldn't have heroes. I can love a person's work and then you meet that person and find out they suck. 

3. For purist sake, is it possible for an artist to be unique by creating something substantial without any influence?

JP: I don't think so, but it depends. There are always new ways of doing things for sure. People can have fresh ideas on how to do something, but everything comes from somewhere. Nothing is new under the sun and I think that as a species we are definitely cyclical. We repeat things, touch on things and appropriate them. I think an arrogant thing is that we're supposed to be a melting pot with our entire culture coming from certain things, but I don't know what's truly original at this point in history. It's not a bad thing. I do a lot of derivative work. I borrow or steal just to use the resources that work and if it doesn't work, whatever, but if it does work, I keep using it.

IR: We are essentially a product of our environment?

JP: Yeah.

4. Do you think you can be just as much influenced by your environment rather than another person?

JP: I think it's both, for sure. I don't think it's more one or the other, but it depends on what you're choosing to make. I'm doing a lot of person in my work and these are images that I've seen or people saw throughout my life. At least what I do is a reflection of what I see and put out when working within. Other people see the world in different ways and so the art comes out differently. You might be using techniques or tools, but maybe that's the thing that is unique if you're being honest and true to what you're doing in that sense.

IR: It's subjective on what is important to us. You can look at a NASCAR, a color, or a person for inspiration.

JP: Exactly. My friend Taylor did a painting with an Evian bottle on it and it's interesting because he never really uses branding in his paintings, but it's interesting to see how he does it from a different point of view than me. I do a lot of brand stuff and someone else doing the brand thing is different because if I painted an Evian bottle, it would be totally different from his because we're all looking at it from a different perspective. 

5. Speaking of perspective, I feel we live in an age where likes are at a higher value than money. Which, if played right, can lead to something profitable for an artist. From a marketing point of view, how do you as an artist find that balance as an artist while navigating to success without antics and solely good work?

JP: Yeah, some people can get lost in the sauce(laughs). Either way, I try to be more of the latter and things like social media kind of might give you a false sense of superiority or inferiority in a sense. Maybe if you didn't get enough likes on a post it doesn't mean it's bad or good. It is what is it. It doesn't dictate or judge the quality of your work, but people definitely might get caught up in shit like that or caught in their own hype, so they believe the bullshit and let it go to their heads. At the end of the day as an artist or whoever you're you in the end and not to say art isn't important, but you should be very grateful for what you have because very few people can actually sell their work. It's a tiny percent that makes a living off their work. Out of all the artists in the world, that's so rare. How could you not see that and think "Wow! That's a humbling thing.". The fact that someone is coming into my studio and interviewing me for this magazine is insane to me. It's cool and I'm grateful.

IR: I mean, you put in the work to get here.

JP: Maybe, but a lot of people put in work. Humility is something that's not shown a lot on social media or necessarily encouraged. A lot of people think you have to have this certain bravado that's genuinely false.

IR: That's fair. It's some people want to be bigger than their creations.

JP: There's a lot of that. It's hard to say because you can't believe much of what you see on social media... I hope I don't have that presence. 

IR: Not at all. You walk softly and carry a big stick.

JP: Cool(laughs)! Thinking you're the shit is just very unnecessary and there are a lot of things on social media that encourage that. I mean, do your thing, but also be grateful for what you have.

6. In regards to inflated egos, I've noticed that most of your paintings involve famous public figures with big bodies and abnormally small heads in comparison to their stature. Is it intentional or is it simply your aesthetic as an artist?

JP: At first it was just a thing I was playing with by distorting proportions. The story on how I got into that was I did a drawing and a painting of Dennis Rodman and my friend John in New York who's kind of like a meathead, who's the best, but he's a bro from Long Island and he was like "Look at those baby bird shoulders!". And he was so right, so I made one with inflated shoulders.

IR: The NLF Blitz create-a-player version!

JP: Yeah, exactly(laughs)! After that I was like "Damn, I kind of like that one." and just started playing with the proportions. Sometimes they're a little more extreme. Sometimes less. It's just with these guys the portraits give the perspective of something grandiose. Someone said that it makes them feel like "a kid looking at their hero".

IR: The physical manifestation of a "Legend".

JP: Ah shit! I'm going to steal that one(laugh)! Yeah, that is a part of it. These are also my play of very traditional portraits. It's a stylistic thing but it also kind of works with what I'm doing.

IR: Yeah, dude. There's a Greek or Roman mythology element to it. You use shading like how a sculpture chisels to define one's strong features.

JP: I think of them like a titan or hero figure that you would see these big statues of. Definitely.

7. Many artists use public figures in their work as means of a poetic message or simply used as mockery and entertainment. What are you conveying when using these figures?

JP: It's a little of both. It depends. One could be someone that has inspired me or some of these guys are just sort of a vessel to play with color or abstract colors. When I paint I sort of use the figures as a vessel for that and working with scale. I'm able to play within the forms, loosen up, and still maintain boundaries.

8. What attracts you to these specific figures when creating your art?

JP: You're not going to catch me doing somebody or something contemporary. Not likely. I genuinely kind of prefer doing these sports figures or side figures. It doesn't necessarily have to be a legend in the sport. For example, Larry Bird just had a cool mustache and a funny haircut.

IR: He was also a legend for being one of the best shit-talkers.

JP: Totally(laughs). And I like that, but really I like his mullet and the mustache. I like that kind of attitude and that was a factor in it, but I don't know him.

IR: Apparently Larry was just a good ol' blue-collar boy from rural Indiana. There was no basketball culture where he was from. He was a garbage man up until he got into the league. Besides his skills, those midwest values got him to the top.

JP: Totally and I do appreciate him for that. That aspect shows you he's not your typical or traditional star. Everyone wants to be a star and even with artists, we see on social media, it seems that people what to be a star.

IR: Well, they have camps now where people train all their lives to become one. Basketball. Acting. Even Tik-Tok.

JP: It's crazy cause even mediocre or low-level people have millions of followers and it's like "who the hell is this person?!". It's like they have these PR machines that are pumping them into stars because it's...I don't know. People just want to be stars or want to be famous and I'd be careful with that(laughs).

9. What would you like to be known for the most artistically?

JP: I just kind of do what I do and if people connect with it, it's cool. I don't have any goals of "I want to be this or want to be that.". There are so many good artists that I've been surrounded by since coming to LA. So many inspiring artists that it's just not the point to living like that for me. I have goals to continue to make a living with my art and help my mom retire, but not to be somebody.

IR: You mean you don't want to make a clothing brand, a sneaker brand, and possibly run for president?

JP: I mean I would do that. That'd be cool(laughs). It's just I feel more fortunate to be able to have a space and to be able to do this full-time. I've done so many different jobs. My first job was as a camp counselor and from there I worked many other jobs like at a market in Italy with my father, preschool teacher, tour guide, and bar-back/bartender, but it wasn't until this it became clear to me that was driven in this. With jobs, I just moved in between and if it didn't serve me anymore, I'm not doing it anymore. I never put my full self into anything but this. This is what I'm supposed to be doing and luckily I'm very fortunate to be doing this full-time. Everything I've done has led me to this, so I always keep that in mind. I wouldn't change anything because it was beneficial for me to choose that path. It made me more grounded and appreciate what you do and have.

IR: It sounds like you know how to preserve and appreciate the good things in your life. Sounds like you're a working-class artist because you have the background and the backbone for it. Self-taught without a trust fund.

JP: Have you heard that saying "It's easy to be a starving artist when your parents are rich."

IR: But of course.

JP: And it's true. It's funny, but I'm not going to be the one to shit on somebody who comes from money.

IR: Naw, they're lucky. It's just what you do with these privileges and opportunities.

JP: Right. If you're doing your thing and working hard on doing stuff. More power to you as long as you're not an asshole or pretentious dick about things. That's more important. People just have different starting lines. 

10. Which comes to my next question would you rather be loved for what you've created and hated for who you are or loved for who you are and hated for what you've created?

JP: Ah dude(laughs). That's a tricky question.

IR: Well, you said people assumed you're serious or pretentious before they met you.

JP: Right. I'm not concerned with people loving me for anything. You can't control what other people think or feel about you and in this world of social media, people might see me as one thing and another person the other. Maybe they're right, but I'm more concerned with the people around me like friends and family. I have more concerns about how they see me. Obviously you might hear someone like "I don't care about what other people think of me!". Of course, we do. We're all sensitive. We all have egos, but I don't get caught up in what the broader public thinks of me. I'm pretty solid and confident about who I am. I know who I am and if someone thinks I'm something. Maybe I am. Maybe I'm not. That's fine.

IR: All work. No politics.  

JP: Kind of. I don't think people would like that answer if I said I'm not concerned with politics(laughs). It is what it is.

IR: Dude, you're just trying to work.

JP: Yeah and I do think there's this "Art world politics" that goes on. Me and the people that I'm around, we're just working and don't get into the weird scene or whatever it is.

IR: It's hard not to in LA. You can get swept up.

JP: Yeah. I've been here for almost 2 years, but it's easier because I came here not knowing anybody and I slowly started to build relationships, so I was able to be picky about it. Also, I'm old enough that I don't need this big "GO OUT IN THE SCENE AND HANG OUT". I got an early night. I'm trying to go home and see my girlfriend. Shoutouts(laugh). I just chill and maybe if I was in the scene at like 21, I would've been more out there. Luckily that didn't happen.

IR: Maybe that was the universe showing you that things happen for a reason.

JP: Exactly. Now I know who I am and what I want. I never planned anything in my life and sort of went with what felt right at the time. Now I have a focus and passion that has found me able to do what I do. My main concern now is doing what I love to do and doing it the best I can.



11. Now let's go back in time. If social media was around during some of your figure's eras, do you think it would be beneficial or detrimental for them?

JP: It would've just accelerated. Social media does more harm than good. Whether it would be good for them, just depends on how you look at it. Would it help them make more money or be famous? Absolutely. It does that. It can do that, but I don't think it's good now for us. It's a useful tool if you use it right, but it's also very harmful. We're the same humans we've always been. This technology has corrupted us, but for me, it's done well. There are benefits, but everyday it can cause me unnecessary stress, so it would be the same for them. They're the same kind of people as us even though we like to seem like we're advanced.

 

Photos courtesy the artist and @alexandrakern.