Allan D. Hasty Looks at the Branding of Drugs in 'I Want Candy'
[Allan D. Hasty] is considered by some to be a cultural shepherd. Subversive in the Warhol sense, Hasty has tackled issues in his works ranging from sexual exploitation to violence, power, insecurity and fear. In his latest exhibition, I Want Candy at [The Proposition](http://www.theproposition.com/wp/) gallery, he takes on the theme of commercialized branding and turns it on its ear by making the connection between the drug trade and corporate marketing schemes.
Just as Madison Avenue is filled with executives in boardrooms fine-tuning the most important aspects of branding product, Hasty turns to the little plastic baggies used to distribute drugs to convey his idea of advertising. These baggies contain often iconic images and seem to be a way to persuade the user to come back to the same source each time. In other words, Hasty points out the subliminal way the drug trade uses images of cute animals, superheroes, candy graphics, skulls, devils, etc. as a way of branding their merchandise. By comparing the selling of a cup of Folgers to marketing drugs (as his press release does), he points out the common thread in American marketing: memorable logos
His press release is great: Collecting and categorizing these tiny, plastic baggies has been a focus of Hasty for some years now, originally appearing as marred, distressed photographs. But recently, the artist has chosen to present the works with no manipulation, he simply paints them "as is" and in doing so they become emblematic of rotting corporate ideals, consumer complicity and, at a much lower, more demonic level, an attempt by drug dealers to brand and market their super-strong-but-wont-make-you-paranoid Thai stick, , numb-your-gums Cocaine or so Ive been told.
This might all seem to be a bit much, but he makes it work by using repetition with a supreme use of color. Hasty silk screens each individual image (similar to what Warhol did) and blows them up on large canvases. Each image, taken directly from the baggie, is rendered raw. In this way he makes a statement about the degradation/survival of the brand. Its also something that is in code. Take for example, the painting entitled Bubble. Since that title is matched with images of someone blowing a bubble, one might assume that the baggie may have once contained cocaine (blow). If someone wasnt aware of this type of marketing, they would just see these images as a repetitive form of art, and nothing more. On the other hand, if you do recognize the branding, then what does that say?
One might ask: is this valid art? In lesser hands, this could have just been some kitschy gimmick. What elevates this is the care that was necessary to silk-screen each individual image and contextualize them. You can actually feel the degradation that he implies. The effective use of color keeps the eye moving. Most paintings make use of a central perspective, where the color is lightened. Without these elements, I probably would have walked out as soon as I walked in.
[ Alan D. Hasty's "I Want Candy" through Aug. 2 at The Proposition, 559 W. 22nd St. (betw. 10th & 11 Aves.), ]