David Shrigley is a Glasgow-based artist. He attended City of Leicester Polytechnic's Art and Design course in 1987-1988, and subsequently studied Environmental Art at the Glasgow School of Art from 1988-1991. Shrigley is a lifelong supporter of Nottingham Forest FC.
Although he works in various media, he is best known for his mordantly humorous cartoons released in softcover books or postcard packs.
Like the poet Ivor Cutler, Shrigley finds humour in flat depictions of the inconsequential, the unavailing and the bizarre - although he is far fonder of violent or otherwise disquieting subject matter. Shrigley's work has two of the characteristics often encountered in outsider art - an odd viewpoint, and (in some of his work) a deliberately limited technique. His freehand line is often weak, which jars with his frequent use of a ruler; his forms are often very crude; and annotations in his drawings are poorly executed and frequently contain crossings-out (In authentic outsider art, the artist has no choice but to produce work in his or her own way, even if that work is unconventional in content and inept in execution. In contrast, it is likely that Shrigley has chosen his style and range of subject matter for comic effect).
As well as authoring several books, he directed the video for Blur's 'Good Song' and also for Bonnie 'Prince' Billy's 'Agnes Queen of Sorrow'. From 2005 he has contributed a cartoon for The Guardian's Weekend magazine every Saturday. He is represented in Paris by the by Yvon Lambert Gallery, and in 2005 designed a London Underground leaflet cover.
David Shrigley co-directed an animate!-commissioned film with award-winning director Chris Shepherd called Who I Am And What I Want, based on Shrigley's book of the same title. Kevin Eldon voiced its main character, Pete. He also produced a series of drawings and t-shirt designs for the 2006 Triptych festival, a Scottish music festival lasting for three to four days in three cities. He has also designed twelve different covers for Deerhoof's 2007 record, Friend Opportunity.
The name of Jason Mraz's third studio album We Sing. We Dance. We Steal Things. is a reference to a piece of art by Shrigley which caught Mraz's attention while he was travelling through Scotland
David Shrigley is a personal hero of mine because he doodles things very poorly and occasionally labels or otherwise annotates his abysmal doodlings with banalities, which when juxtaposed with his faux-primitivist scribbles transform them (somehow!) into something new and sublime and sad and meaningful and profound. And funny too, of course.
Shrigley's art resembles 'outsider art' -- or it mimics the imminent, unmediated relationship between an artistically untrained but an embarrassingly enthused doodler and his passion for expression. Clumsy expression. Very, very clumsy expression. Oh yes, it's all very ironic, you understand, but not in an irritating, Urban Outfitters t-shirt kind of ironic way.
Do you know Henry Darger? He's probably one of the most 'famous' outsider artists. He was this lonely old shut-in who had no friends and spent much of his time writing an extremely long, baroque, illustrated religious novel featuring a warrior cult of girls in frilly dresses (and, oh yeah... with penises). He was so socially isolated that he wasn't aware females didn't have penises. Now that's an outsider. Anyway, if you look at his drawings and read snippets of the novel (because who in their right mind would or could read the deranged several-thousand-page manuscript in its unedited entirety?), you'll probably find it fascinating, but more so in a psychological case study sort of way rather than as an (unironically regarded) example of primitivist art.
Shrigley remedies the problem by giving us the best of both worlds. No, he isn't an outsider. He's probably very much an insider. Yet he uses the form and ostensible strategies of outsider art... but artfully, fashioning a (difficult) blend of Art with a capital A and entertainment value. It really is funny. And it really is sad. Red Book, his latest book, seems conspicuously sad to me, but also a significant advancement over some of his earlier work.
At first I was somewhat amused by the drawings, but as I continued through the book I started to feel like I was getting a glimpse of a somewhat disturbed person's view of things while they were high at which point I became bored with it all. Now I'm wondering why this book was published in the first place.
This is the kind of art I'm interested in. Its polarizing. Its not beautiful because its made by someone with extraordinary talent. His drawings are doodles that come straight out of his stream of consciousness. Some of them are funny. Some cause you to ponder. Some are disgusting and some I want to frame on my wall. If it causes me to stop, look, think and move on either in anger or happiness, it has done its job.
I found in this book a more cohesive collection of works by David Shrigley. I bet ‘cohesive’ sounds more like an insult in describing a work like Shrigley’s but it’s not at all a bad critique especially to somebody who’s worked too hard on the inside of the art industries and institutions to make their work look art-brut. To look like an outsider. Red Book may not necessarily be his best collection but it’s one of those I appreciated the most. Having some sort of structure, as far as what constitutes structure among his works, it perhaps lacks that quality of jumbled mess most fans are familiar with but I don’t mind it. It’s still as sad and bizarre as ever, and most of the time, barely coherent but it’s a Shrigley alright. It’s also slightly more graphic than I remember David Shrigley being. You expect wit in the wrong places and it jumps right at you when you least expect it.
This was garbage. A perfect example of how not everyone can be or should be an artist. And the "book" was made during an artist residency?? Lol embarrassing. 1/2 stars because at least the author had the courage to publish this in the first place and that should be commended.
It's a book of black 'n' white doodles. Anyone could have drawn these, really, and many I'm sure much better. I don't know if the ugliness of the drawings and occasional misspellings were deliberate, and if they were, I don't know what the creator was trying to prove. There are oodles of male genitalia depicted throughout the book, as well as sometimes hacking, stabbing, disembowelment, defecation, urination, and other disgusting stuff. Once again, I very often failed to see the point in their inclusion. Some sketches do make you do a double-take and think about the meaning behind them, but more often than not, the illustrations were head-scratching and not witty nor funny nor amusing. If I were to give a summary of this book, I'd say it's something someone with a sick mind who thought they were smart came up with. Only mildly interesting if you're curious to look inside said individual's mind.
A big book of Shrigley (many of his other books are quite small). I love the existentialism embedded in his work; I think it gets at philosophy a lot more quickly than many actual books of philosophy. Plato would roll over in his grave to hear me praise aesthetics as a vehicle for philosophy, but David Shrigley, intentionally or otherwise, does it as effectively, enjoyably, and efficiently as any artist I've seen.
Or, they are just a bunch of dumb-ass drawings. Remarkably entertaining, in any case.
i don't know if i should love David Shrigley for making such a nicely offensive book of thought-provoking images or hate myself for ever buying this piece of...uhh....shit.