Interview with Ian McCramy

by

Duncan Shaw III on March 22, 2002
Ian McCramy was born in 1960 in Athens, Ohio. His education includes a BFA in Communications from the University of Bowling Green with a minor in Comparative Linguistic. He went on to receive an M.A. in Speech Pathology from Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio. In 1986, he received a Louise Kilamer fellowship for researching the effects of speech on cognate relationships. It was during his research that he uncovered primitive Sicilian “Saiantos” (small illustrations depicting speech). In order to fully understand the meaning of these illustrations he sought the aid of artist Encano Cisstoni. With the help of Cisstoni, McCramy was able to decipher the “Saintos” into a book documenting the nine “Plantanos” (rules of speech etiquette). In 1990 through 1992, McCramy studied painting and drawing with Eileen Stembolski at Antioch University in Yellow Springs Ohio. He received the Helen Wolfrin Prize for contemporary drawing in 1997. He recently had concurrent retrospectives at the Walker Art Center and the Modern Museum of Art in Rome. Ian McCramy is currently represented by the Heller Gallery in New York, New York and the Clack Gallery in Chicago, Illinois.
"RASPBERRY" ink, colored pencil on paper 1994
Duncan Shaw III: You have been described as “an artist producing works that circumvent the inelegance of paradoxical speech”. Would you elaborate on this?

Ian McCramy: Yes, simply put Mr. Shaw. My concern, and might I add this has simply always been the point, is the inherent pathological speech dynamics found in relationships. So then, I use these “works of art”, these “symbols of spoken revelation” as the Plantanos states, to address pathological speech.

Shaw: Writing in the introduction for “Interpreting Spoken Symbols” a work written by Nancy Oshea, you said, “Our tongues are nothing more than pens inscribing symbols upon the soul. Once we interpret their meaning we are moved either to the dirt, water, fire or sky above. However, not in that order and sometimes in combinations.” Can you expound on this thought?

McCramy: Mr. Shaw, the importance of the tongue has always intrigued me. As a child I suffered from a rather rare disease called Debusealou. The name comes from a twelfth century knight that before each battle would insult his servant. He would say simply horrible words to his servant and so much so and with such physicality that it caused him to bite his tongue. This was his eventual downfall. While on the outskirts of Jerusalem during the Third Crusades, Debusealou began insulting his servant for not properly polishing his armor. His derisive tirade reached such a pitch that he bit his tongue and bled to death. Upon his death a debate between Philip Augustus, King of France and Richard the Lion Hearted, King of England, arose over the rules of armor style. Philip preferred armor that was polished to a highly reflective state so
"SELF PORTRAIT" ink, colored pencil on paper 1994

that he could see himself while performing inspections. Richard, on the other hand, felt armor should be more modest, comfortable, and ready to ware. With the two Kings unable to come to an agreement, their chances for victory were shattered.

Shaw: So, you used to bite your tongue as a child?

McCramy: Oh, quite right Mr. Shaw. Indeed, and often. Biting the tongue was truly a McCramy trait. Family gatherings were moments soaked with derision. Seldom did anyone wear white. As a child I did, but not as a young man.

Shaw: When did you stop biting your tongue?

McCramy: Well Mr. Shaw, I believe it was at the age of fifteen. I had come home from another truly bloody day at school. I mean really, my shirt and pants were simply saturated in blood and like a delicate cricket my mother says to me, “He causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.”

Shaw: Isn’t that a quote from the Gospel of Mathew.

McCramy: Mr. Shaw, really, my mothers name was Kay.

Shaw: The Plantanos was very important for your career as a speech pathologist and additionally influential in your ultimate transition to art. After publishing the Plantanos a dispute between you and Encano Cisstoni arose over the meaning of the word, “book”. Can you recount the dispute between yourself and Cisstoni and what influence did it and Cisstoni have on you as an artist.
"THIS HOUSE IS MY HOUSE " ink, colored penciL, oil on paper 1997
McCramy: Mr. Shaw, after we vigilantly published the Plantanos in no less than 17 languages, indeed, a dispute between Mr. Cisstoni and myself did arise over the meaning of, the word, “book”. You see, Mr. Cisstoni contended that the Plantanos, although thick, well bound, with a bibliography, index, footnotes and a topical outline, should not implicitly be categorized as a book. Mr. Cisstoni said, “Yes, it has words neatly arranged on rectangular shapes of paper, and I like reading it, but should one call it a book? No, no, no, no, no, and no.” This is simply the kind of man I was dealing with. I mean really, Mr. Cisstoni was the kind of gentleman that simply thought the concept of a public library and a librarian was for the intellectually and emotionally unhinged. I can remember him saying, “If one cannot afford to buy books then one should not read.” With that said, I must simply say that were it not for Mr. Cisstoni, I may never have been exposed to the visual arts. What I mean is truly for the very first time, I observed the varying processes of conceptualizing something visually and then physically actualizing it. I simply am not saying that some simple form of processes and actualization does not occur in Speech Pathology, it does. Take the process of someone saying the words, “I like doorknobs” and then further add the words “I will turn the doorknob”. Any sensible individual of sensible sense can see the strong correlation. Yes indeed Mr. Shaw. Anyways, it was during my time of really seeing Mr. Cisstoni work that the thought occurred me that that was something I could do.

Shaw: How did your work on the translation of the “Saiantos” affect your use of the tongue as a symbol?

McCramy: Mr. Shaw, sincerely, the Saintos were enormously important to my use of the tongue as a symbol of the circumambulating habits inherent in human speech. I mean really, take Mr. Cisstoni as an example. Here is a man that persists on simply avoiding his painfully obvious emotional flaw. To put it simply, he suffers from enormously large insecurities that make him incapable of reading in public. It is that kind of behavior that makes one wonder if he can even read at all.
"THIS USED TO BE MY HOUSE" ink, aquarell on paper 1996
Shaw: At the encouragement of Eileen Stembolski, in 1992 you began work on your series This House Is My House This House Is Your House This House is Our House. How did Stembolski encourage you and what was your inspiration for that series?

McCramy: Miss. Eileen was simply a delightfully spirited woman. She had the truly uncanny ability to draw out of someone what she delicately called “The little gnats of the human dilemma”. Miss. Eileen literally raised to the surface all the problems of my family that I was truly trying to avoid. Yes, indeed, it was at that time of delicate discovery that I began work on This House is My House This House is Your House This House is Our House or as I sometimes like to refer to it, the McCramy house with the gold roof and all those large velvety red tongues. You see Mr. Shaw; being a trained speech pathologist, I simply saw the problems of my family as simply synonymous with a large velvety red tongue.

Shaw: I recall you saying in your interview with ARTnews magazine that it had something to do with the death of your family dog, Ted.
"YOURS, MINE, OURS" ink, colored pencil, oil on paper 1997
McCramy: Well, indeed, the death of Ted was in some way the catalyst of the whole spiteful affair. I mean really, the death of the family dog is truly tragic for most of us. However, it was after Ted’s strictly sad passing on that contentions within the family arose. You see Mr. Shaw, Ted had amassed quite an enormous collection of T-Bones that he preferred to bury in the family rose garden. The entire McCramy family knew of Ted’s collection and after his death most everyone had an opinion on what should be done with them. Aunt Gwenith wanted them cleaned with lye and sold in the annual McCramy garage sale. Aunt Beatty thought the bones should have been unearthed and then carefully examined to determine if indeed they were T-Bones. Uncle Jacob thought they should have stayed buried in the garden because the roses never looked better. Aunt Lilly knew of the bones but was never quite sure where the garden was. With all of the differences of opinions, Grandpapa simply called a family meeting in hope of putting the matter to rest. Truly, I remember that gathering well. It was a balmy evening on September the seventh nineteen hundred and eighty nine. The table was carefully set with all of the McCramy fine linens and china. We all had our assigned seats arranged by uncle Jacob to stimulate good derisive conversation. Grandmamma even set out her most priced gravy ladle. It was simply a delicious dinning affair. Well, It was during the appetizer that, after I requested my Aunt Lilly to simply please pass the strawberries with her “washed hand”, Grandpapa Toto suddenly stood up and in a feverish state said, “That fucking dog has buried all his fucking t-bones out in the rose garden and now it smells like fucking dead shit out there.” Grandpapa Toto had a simply subtle way with words and he was very fond of the Wizard of Oz and would often expound at great length and with emotional verve his contention that Toto would have made a much more gracious and objective wizard. He went on to say, “and now that that fucking mutt is dead were all going out there and each one of you fuckers is taking a bone with you, you bunch of ungrateful sons of bitches.” Grandpapa of course never thought Grandmamma a bitch and truly loved her deeply. Unfortunately Grandpapa reached such a state of emotional intensity that it simply caused him a coronary. He, like Ted, passed on. Well, unfortunately the matter of what to do with those bones has not been resolved to this very day.

Shaw: This brings us to what the critic Lorraine Polabski said about your work. After seeing This House is My House This House is Your House This House is Our House she had this to say, “McCramy has the uncanny
ability to impart his work with symbols that represent the quandary inherent in interaction. His work resonates the gratuitous violence in a family that lives for instant gratification.”

McCramy: Truly, I always find it most interesting to read Miss. Lorraine’s work. She has never allowed her unseemly battle with alcohol to render her further inept. However, I am not sure when she described the paintings of Ross Bleckner as, “ a pap smear taken from females painted by Puvis De Chavannes”, that she wasn’t looking at her own.

Shaw: Her painting?

McCramy: No, her pap smear.

Shaw: What motivates you as an artist?

McCramy: Oh, It seems I have bitten my tongue.

Shaw: Would you like to stop the interview?

McCramy: No, no, I am quite fine thank you. Oh, yes, what motivates me? Mr. Shaw, it is simply a little “gem” from the Plantanos. “Speak always for someone is always listening.”
If you would like to comment about this interview or any other interview with Duncan Shaw III you may do so at:

duncanshaw@museumofcivilform.com