Camden's Knife

by John Patrick Kavanagh

  Approximately 1-in-40 Class C carriers, however, may experience one of the five Class A prognosis profiles within six to 25 months of onset.

  Twenty-six percent of all individuals tested and monitored have been identified as Class D carriers. The Class D designation is a misnomer, however. Class D carriers evidence neither blood clues nor symptoms. Class D carriers are apparently immune to Camden-Young’s Disease, al-though the nature of this immunity has yet to be explained. Recent reports concerning an antibody blood clue in Class D carriers are clearly premature in their conclusions. Likewise, reports indicating that Class D carriers possess a genetic predisposition not held by other carriers are equally premature in their conclusions.

  The Febrifuge Blue line of products is extremely effective in the treatment of general CYD symptoms, especially fever and thirst, and serve no other purpose. Febrifuge Blue should be used only under the direction of a doctor or a registered CYD treatment center. Febrifuge Blue is not a cure or vaccine. Those afflicted with CYD should take only recommended doses. Those not afflicted with CYD should not use Febrifuge Blue products. The improper consumption of any drug can result in serious harm to the user.

  If you are 14 to 32 years of age, we recommend a basic Tourcam or the recently introduced Tourcam Three as diagnosis is the first step in a successful program of CYD treatment. If you have reached age 33 and have experienced no CYD symptoms and have previously tested negative, consider having a follow-up test to verify your good fortune. This will also assist in the ongoing collection of data on which thousands of lives may depend.

  Before concluding, two myths should be dispelled:

  First, CYD is not contagious and is not passed from individual to individual. It is present in our environment, and every American in every one of the 50 states has no doubt been exposed. Alaskans and Hawaiians are no exception.

  Secondly, the 26% of the population not afflicted with CYD are not necessarily healthier than the other 74%. They are, possibly, simply different in their blood chemistry. That difference may someday be exploited to the benefit of all, but currently it holds only a hope, not a promise. Along these lines, the practice of transfusing the blood of a Class D carrier for purposes of establishing immunity should be avoided. We expect it will soon be outlawed.

  Some of the competitors of Southern United Enterprises make excellent products. Some do not. Some of our competitors have only the best interests of the consumer in mind. Some do not. We at SUE believe in excellent products and the best interests of the consumer. And we believe in truth.

  Some irresponsible journalists and irresponsible competitors continue to promote the worn-out story that the Febrifuge Blue line of products has somehow entered its twilight. Nothing could be further from the truth.

  Under the direction of Dr. Raymond Hickey, the Febrifuge Blue line of products has recently experienced a spectacular evolution and we expect even greater success in the upcoming months. Our research team is the best it has ever been, and so is our product.

  Remember that rainbows come in colors, but only Febrifuge comes in blue. When your doctor asks if you have a preference, tell him you don’t want a best seller, you want the best seller.

  As we are certain you have heard Wexford say: “There’s a lot of twos and threes and sixes in the world, but only a single one. Febrifuge.”

  Febrifuge. It only comes in blue.

  (Copies of this brochure are provided as a public service and are available through pharmacies, treatment centers, and physicians selling or distributing the Febrifuge Blue line of products.)

  Febrifuge, Febrifuge Blue, Tourraix-Camden and Tourcam are trademarks of Southern United Enterprises.

  All rights reserved.

  Privileged & Confidential

  This document was prepared under the direct supervision of Garrison G. Hanson, Esq., a member of the New Mexico State Bar, and is protected as an Attorney Work Product and as an Attorney/Client Communication. It was prepared for Mr. Hanson’s EYES ONLY and may not be copied or transmitted to any person and/or entity by any means without his approval.

  CURATOR’S NOTES &

  COMBAT ART INVENTORY(v2)

  www.thecombatartzone.com —code w634273

  Garrison,

  The photographs of the selection of images provided to accompany this Inventory were taken in haste (as requested) so should not be construed to be accurate reproductions of the works, but rather submitted for reference only. Though some appear crooked, they aren’t; a handheld camera, questionable lighting and a quick cropping do not masterpieces make. Additionally, the works chosen are meant to convey an overview of the Artist’s Oeuvre, both highlights and lowlights, instead of favoring some images over others.

  Execution Time Line

  Though speculative, it’s believed that the order in which JLD created the works, based on currently available evidence, can be broken down to a pair of considerations, those being Set to Set and Set Within a given Set. Set One represents the initial output and the examples were, with some exceptions, created in the order in which they are numbered. That #1 is titled Combat Prototype would support this thesis, in addition to the fact that the use of spent shell casings was prominent in the early works but abandoned soon after.

  Based on the unusual numbering within the various Sets, especially Set Four, I’d speculated that most all of the works on paper in Sets Four, Five, Six, Seven and Eight began toward the end of the Set One paintings (except the Repeaters). It cannot be an accident that the large Set Four works contain numerous triangles and begin their numbering at #72, while the Set One paintings feature pyramids in four consecutive examples and also begin at #72.

  At this juncture, I believe that following the completion of the paper examples JLD commenced work on Sets Two, Three and Nine. (Please note that based on the Red Numbers and subject matter, Sets Three and Nine are best described as parts of Set Two but are distinguished due to their specific natures). Further, it appears that five of the Set Three constructions on their reverse sides were used as what might be referenced as blocking devices in the execution three of the earlier Set Two Jacksons. Further, #125 and #126, the companion items to the triptych #131, when their wood surface areas are added to all of the wood surface areas of Set Three, equals exactly the size of one, four by eight foot panel of pine from which everything was probably cut. Finally, notwithstanding the creative lyrical detail appearing in Set Four and Five, the overall sophistication of the Set Two works and the quality/size/cost of the presumed Set Eleven leads to the conclusion Set Two represents the final (known) examples of his Oeuvre.

  General Discussion

  The progression of his works, if the Time Line is correct, appears to be a natural one with no extraordinary features. The earliest works are mostly grays, with occasional touches of red paint, along with handmade etched stencils created for new examples and the use of spent shell casings. More reds are then introduced as Set One progresses, followed by blue shades. The backgrounds begin to show cross-hatched scratchings, an interesting aspect continuing into many of the Set Two canvases and most of the Set Three constructions. The use of myriad colors in the Set Two canvases could to be a continuation of their use in the Sets Four-Eight works on paper. The bullet and buckshot holes appearing in the earlier Set One canvases and especially on some Set Four surfaces (when overlaid) suggest they were all accomplished at the same time and probably before he commenced work on anything. As with many artists, his early efforts demonstrate a calm struggle to discover exactly what was going to be accomplished and how that goal might be achieved. But another possibility regarding the use of more color in the Set Two canvases will be addressed, infra.

  A few days ago, I was surprised and quite pleased to have discovered a notebook among JLD’s effects which provides valued information concerning many aspects of his work. One of the most compelling entries explains the genesis of Combat Art, which came about while vacationing in Pensacola, Florida at a rented condo with his girlfrie
nd Patricia. One rainy afternoon while she was out picking up some shrimp for dinner, he was watching a cable channel and saw back-to-back clips of a Soldier of Fortune convention in Las Vegas, followed by “some guy in Europe” throwing paint into the engine of a small jet that splattered on large canvases. Based on this fortuitous mingling of concepts, JLD decided he’d discovered his own hook (for which he’d apparently been searching for a long time) with which to launch a career in painting. Within “an hour, two at the most,” he’d settled on the primary elements: 1. Everything would be identified by the phrase Combat Art; 2. All of the works would have gray backgrounds; 3. All of the canvas stretchers would be wrapped in silver duct tape; 4. All of the works would contain another stenciled word or phrase; 5. All of the works would contain bullet holes and/or spent casings; 6. None of the works would have to be “perfectly in line with their straightness” (sic), and; 7. All of the works would show some “weartear” (sic) because “during the fog of the war within the creative process, some shit is bound to happen either by accident or on purpose.”

  Set One, #1 Combat Prototype certainly meets the requirements exactly, but then he quickly veered in new directions. While the first four in the catalogue do indeed feature bullet holes and the spent shell casings, these items had been abandoned after #15 (in fact, a few later works apparently had them in their first iterations but were subsequently removed and the canvases reworked). The only other location bullet holes appear are the buckshot spreads in the Set Four Observations. The use of a background color other than gray begins at #3. Strangely, he did continue to wrap virtually all of the Set One works with duct tape, and basically kept with the additional word/phrase mandate. The addition of other objects began to surface early, in #16 Makeup.

  Through the #30s, he continued to dabble with but then discard alternate protocols (for instance, cutting slices into the canvases of #s 32-34), but by the #40s it’s clear he was, in his own words, “finally in the pocket.” I cannot disagree with this assessment.

  A few anomalies should be noted, especially regarding Set Two. #s 109, 110, 111, 112, 128 and 130 (and possibly others) undoubtedly started off as one image but were then altered to create another. The same is definitely true of #127 for reasons stated infra. #49 Tough Darts is an example of a second look at an earlier effort, retaining the original etched logo while the other letters use a font that doesn’t begin to surface until the crossover from Set One to Set Two, with single letter stencils rather than an etched word or phrase such as those used in most of the Set One works.

  Turning to the five Set Two Jacksons, a few observations are in order. First, JLD’s disdain for Pollock is palpable and the main reason seems to be explained in #107 via reference to his brother having been killed by a drunk driver who also died in the same accident. (As you probably know, Pollock, driving while intoxicated, died when his car struck a tree, throwing him out of the vehicle. One of his passengers was also killed, and another was permanently injured in the same event). This event is also referenced in various ways in the other four Jacksons. While his mimicking of Pollock’s style serves best as satire, parody and mockery in the completion of the first three examples in this subset, it is equally startling how his skill at duplication improves in the execution of #s 127 and 133. Clearly more confident in his ability to channel (circa 1950) Pollock even though working with alternate mediums, his satisfaction is obvious. So much so that in both works he uses the same color palate instead of the variations employed in #s 105, 106 & 107. #127, based on the Shroud associated with it, and an examination of the reverse, was apparently initially executed with a deep green background on about a quarter of each side, with the center reserved for the drippings. The two most logical explanations for this change are: 1. that following the completion of #133, JLD was so pleased with the result that he then reworked #127 to match it, or; 2. that he became disenchanted with #127 earlier, reworked it and was so pleased with the results that he duplicated it in the creation of #133. In either case, the results are the finest demonstration of his ability to reconsider his efforts and then elect to improve the product. I’d note that the five colors used in these two works are the same five employed in all of the Set One works, those being black, red, white, blue and gray. Of greatest interest re: #127 are the facts that the primary stenciling is much more subdued and blended than that in the other Jacksons and that it’s the only example out of all of the works on canvas which does not include the CA logo within the image (but is stenciled on the reverse). This is doubtfully not an oversight, as its inclusion would distract from the exacting symmetry this particular work displays.

  The Jacksons, in turn, offer interesting counterpoints to the trio of large canvases devoted to his tributes to Jasper Johns. It goes without saying that Johns stands as the primary template of inspiration for the entirety of Set One, confirmed by the continuation of the five color palate into the first and fourth works of Set Two. Additional clues as to this devotion to Johns can be found in a small library which includes six volumes dealing with his muse, three of them the hefty exhibition catalogues The Drawings of Jasper Johns, National Gallery of Art, Washington (1990), Jasper Johns—A Retrospective, MoMA, New York (1996-1997), and Jasper Johns—GRAY, The Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago, (2007-2008).

  However, an additional book points to another influence: The Mechanism of Meaning, Abbeville Press, New York, © 1979- 1988, written by (Shusaku) Arakawa & (Madeline) Gins. I am astonished that the works of Arakawa were completely unknown to me, especially because the volume was clearly an expensive undertaking, not to mention the fact that the Arakawa’s oeuvre was massive and completely original. Like JLD, Arakawa made extensive use of stenciled and handwritten text along with both original and borrowed images to present non-sequiturs and complex observations, from the profound to absolute silliness. While JLD’s works are pretty straight forward (in that the subject matter is for the most part not difficult to grasp), Arakawa takes this basic premise to more complicated levels. That’s not to detract from JLD’s Oeuvre as his work speaks for itself.

  While it’s evident from the entire body of work that he suffered from balance and spatial difficulties (probably along with moderate vertigo which those afflicted with CYD encounter), the most obvious examples occur in the largest works of Set Two based on the oftentimes erratic stenciling and interior bordering. Likewise, some of the larger works on paper show drifting down on vertical orientations from left to right despite the fact he was probably using a ruler or other straight edge to tightly pack the lines of prose. #129 of Set Two TB&GITB, one of the final canvases, provides clear evidence. In addition, JLD himself observes in the text of Set Four #79 that as a result of eye surgery at the age of five he was burdened with an extreme astigmatism in his left eye, and adds in passing that he never wore his glasses whilst painting.

  Only two of the works have been framed, those being Combat Sex of Set One and Illinois #2 of the Repeaters. Additionally, Study for Drunk of Set Two is mounted in a double matte.

  A mysterious work is #134 Susanna and the Pharaoh. While labeled as the penultimate painting of Set Two, it more probably, at least in an earlier version, dates back to #s 72-75 of Set One, thus making it the first example executed on the larger, hand constructed canvases. Other aspects of interest include: 1. The ghost shadow of the second pyramid, this background detail unique among all of the acrylics; 2. The adobe shade used in the smaller pyramid (and visible in other areas of the surface, indicating its entirety was originally painted in this color) which never appears again, and; 3. The reference to singer Susanna Hoffs (of the 1980s pop group The Bangles), also mentioned by name in Set Two #s 129 & 135, Set Four #76 Gold/Hoffs, Set Five #120 and a few of the other smaller works on paper. As the second to last numbered work in Set Two, though possibly also the first to have been begun on one of the hand constructed canvases, further study is suggested.

  Questions naturally arise concerning paintings missing from the collection based on what
we have in our possession, the numbering sequences and the Surfaces Inventory list. Of Set One’s presumed eighty-three canvases, 10 are presently unaccounted for. Despite the current widespread notoriety of the JLD’s work, nobody has come forward with any claims of possession regarding them (which would be expected), so my current thinking is that they never existed, were destroyed or might exist bearing alternate numbering and/or were reworked and appear elsewhere in the Set One sequence.

  Of much greater interest are the Set Eleven Missing Fifteen. I’ll guess that they were created and most assuredly do still exist for the following reasons: 1. All of the Set Eleven canvases (are likely) either hand-constructed or were custom fabricated at JLD’s direction, so it’s highly unlikely that, if for no other reason than their material value in labor expended and dollars spent, he would have disposed of them by any means, and; 2. While the Set One works demonstrate a very flowing, natural progression in the maturing of his sense of direction and developing craftsmanship, the Set Two works mark a major shift in styling. Though this could be a consequence of the lengthy period devoted to the works on paper, a better argument could be made for the proposition that the Set 11 canvases contain the roadmap of the transition between Sets One and Two.

  As to the whereabouts of Set Eleven, I haven’t a clue except to note that he took very good care of the works in his possession. That being said, I suspect that they’ll probably be found, perhaps under the protection of someone he trusted.