Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

Socialize

Iron City May Can In Latrobe

By

I saw this last week in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

Then & Now.

 You may recall that in January of this year, Iron City announced temporary layoffs of approximately 25% of their workforce while they shut down the canning line for evaluation.

New evidence is now pointing to their moving their canning business to the nearby Latrobe Brewery, the former home of Rolling Rock beer. They’ve been producing their cans at High Falls Brewing, which is in Rochester, New York. But fueled by the Latrobe workers’ recent approval of an 18-month labor contract, it’s looking more likely that Iron City may find a home closer to Pittsburgh, and Iron City is, after all, “The Official beer of the Pittsburgh Nation.” Read all about it here.

 

Holiday Humor

By

Today was almost entirely void of work, which I confess seemed a little strange. I’m finding not working is getting more difficult lately. So in a spirit of mindless fun, here are two really funny websites I’ve been looking at over the last week. Neither have anything whatsoever to do with beer but both have had me actually laughing out loud on occasion. Enjoy.
 

1. My First Dictionary

My First Dictionary is a hilarious recreation of those old children’s illustrated dictionaries, only the definitions themselves are hilariously twisted. And the idyllic innocence of the art makes them doubly funny. There’s a new one almost every day and I find myself having a hard time waiting until the next day’s is posted. Here’s an example of the only one that references drinking so far.


 

2. Awkward Family Photos

This was listed in “The Must List” of the most recent issue of Entertainment Weekly, which I was reading over the weekend. It’s simply a daily family photo that one might charitably call “awkward.” Awkward Family Photos has some of the most amazingly bad photos you’ve ever seen in one place. We’ve all seen one or two of ourselves or a friend or relative, but these are soooo bad they’ve come back around to the other side and become good again, just on a different level. Here’s an example, a pair of twins.

 

Beer In Art #29: Van de Velde’s Still Life With Tall Beer Glass

By

Today it’s back to the Old Masters, a work painted in 1647, most likely by Jan Jansz Van de Velde III. The piece is entitled Still Life with Tall Beer Glass.

 

Click on the image above for a larger, more detailed view.

The painting is at the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. It’s relatively small, only 64 cm by 59 cm (25 in. x 23 in.) Below is the description of the painting from the museum’s gallery page.

Halfway along the wooden table the tablecloth is pulled back. All kinds of household objects and food are displayed on the tabletop. A large beer glass towers over everything. It is a pass glass, an unusual kind of glass that was used in drinking games. Also on the table are one or two dishes and a pewter jug on its side. Behind the pass glass are a firepan and a pipe. The background of this still life has been kept rather dark, and the objects almost fade into it. It makes the catchlights on the objects are all the more distinct. This was typical of the style of the still life painter Jan Jansz. van de Velde.

That page attributes the painting to his father, Jan Van de Velde II, whereas another page at the Rikjsmuseum website attributes the same painting to the son, Jan Jansz. Van de Velde III. Throughout the web, sources attribute the same painting variously to father or son so I’m at a loss to which one actually painted it. The one clue that seems to suggest that it was III is that Jan Van de Velde II was born in 1593 but died in 1641. If the date of the painting — 1647 — is correct, then it almost has to have been painted by Jan Jansz. Van de Velde III, as he would have been the only Van de Velde painter still alive that year.

Van de Velde III was born in Haarlem, The Netherlands, in 1620 and died in 1662, in the town of Enkhuizen, also in The Netherlands. Throughout his career, he painted a number of still lifes, and several more with beer. For example, the painting below, Still Life with a Beer Glass, a Pipe, Tobacco and Other Requisites of Smoking, from 1658, was sold by Sotheby’s in January of 2009.

Then there’s this one, Still Life with a Pipe-lighter, from the Ashmolean museum at Oxford in England.

It was painted in 1651, and the museum describes the objects in the painting like this:

The objects in this painting reappear in many of van de Velde’s still-life compositions. The same pewter dish (or one very similar) appears in works extending across the artist’s career while the pasglas is found in works dating from 1641 onwards. The details refer to the pleasures of the public house: smoking, drinking and playing cards. The chalk would have been used by the card-players to chalk up the score.

Another Van de Velde at the Ashmolean was the painting below, Still Life with a Clay Pipe, where the Ashmolean has a little more information about the painter:

Van de Velde was born in Haarlem. The hard, brittle translucency of the drinking glasses which appear in many of van de Velde’s still-life compositions is clearly inspired by the Haarlem painter, Willem Claesz. Heda. The accessories in this still life, which include a clay pipe, a glass of beer, a bowl of burning charcoal, playing cards and a piece of chalk, can be found in the work of Jan Jansz. Treck, a painter from Amsterdam whose work would have become familiar to van de Velde after he had settled in Amsterdam.

And TerminArters describes the painting like this.

The hard, brittle translucency of the drinking glasses which appear in many of van de Velde’s still-life compositions is clearly inspired by the Haarlem painter, Willem Claesz. Heda. The accessories in this still life, which include a clay pipe, a glass of beer, a bowl of burning charcoal, playing cards and a piece of chalk, can be found in the work of Jan Jansz. Treck, a painter from Amsterdam whose work would have become familiar to van de Velde after he had settled in Amsterdam.

 

If you want to learn more about the artist, the ArtCyclopedia is about the only place to start. The artist was the third in his family, and not the most well known apparently. Presumably to avoid confusion, Jan is also sometimes referred to as Jan Jansz Van de Velde. His father, Jan Van de Velde II, was better known, and his grandfather, Jan Van de Velde I was fairly well-known, too. Both were also artists and draftsmen. Here’s a short biography of III from the Web Gallery of Art:

Jan Jansz. van de Velde was born in Haarlem to a Dutch family of artists. His father, Jan, drew and made prints, while his nephews Esaias and Anthonie (1617-1672) were both painters. Jan was trained in Haarlem, although who taught him is not known. He specialised in still-life painting. Jan Jansz. van de Velde moved to Amsterdam in 1656. His early still-lifes resemble the work of Pieter Claesz and Willem Heda in both style and content. While in Amsterdam, Van de Velde specialised in small intimate compositions of just a handful of objects.

 

Camping In A Beer Can

By

beer-generic-can
By the time you read this, I’ll be in the mountains above Gualala, a few hours north of home, sprawled out in a rustic cabin for a much-needed battery recharge. But going camping again reminded me of something very, very cool that I saw in Boston at the Craft Brewers Conference last month. Something I so want to buy and put in my backyard, especially if I could customize it however I wanted. Anyway, at the trade show was this giant two-story beer can from Denmark (though the company now making them is from Norway) that was created as a camping vessel, originally for an annual five-day music festival, the Skanderborg Music Festival in Denmark.


 
A Norwegian company, NewCom, licensed the the camping cans from the music festival and now owns the “exclusive rights to produce and market CAN SLEEP. [They’ve] developed a new construction solution that makes it possible to dismount the cans after use and stack them on a transport ramp to make the logistics easier. CAN SLEEP will be ready for production and shipment in 2009.” They weigh 350 kilos, or about 770 lbs.

Here’s the basic information from their website:

CAN SLEEP is an innovative accommodation concept for festivals, events etc. It can also be used as fantastic billboards along the roads, at happenings, at exhibitions or or other suitable places with many people. It will in any case guaranteed draw a lot of attention.

CAN SLEEP is an identical copy of a soda/beer can in aluminum, enlarged to 2.2m [7 1/4 ft.] in diameter and 3.8m [12 1/2 ft.] in height. It can be decorated according to the owners/sponsors wish, and it can be redecorated at any time. Each can has 2 floors where (the first) floor is a small living room, and (the second) floor is a big round bed. At the festival camp they are assembled in 6-packs. The cans are extremely popular among festival participants. In 2007 the Skanderborg Music Festival got 11,000 postcards from participants that wanted to participate in a lottery where the price was a chance to rent one of the 114 cans. In 2006 the festival got over 3,000 e-mails within 30 seconds after the ordering process started.

 

Downstairs is a small living room with chairs, lamps and space for storage.

Upstairs there’s room enough for at least two people to sleep comfortably, with plenty of space to stretch out.

 
I so wanted to buy one on the spot and put it in my backyard. Deciding whose can design to put on it was the hardest problem I thought I’d be facing. I was thinking “sponsorship!” Alas, I was wrong. When I talked to the company rep., he told me they’re not yet in the states and when they do start selling here, the minimum will be a six-pack. Personally, I think they’re making a huge mistake. They’re missing out on a lot of sales by not selling them singly. Maybe they don’t understand the American market and its appetite for novelty.

So it’s a dead idea, dammit all. Unless, of course, I can find five other people in the Bay Area and we can all go in on a six-pack? Anybody interested? Sadly, I don’t have any idea about the actual cost, but that’s a bridge I’m willing to cross once we get there. I thought perhaps that my wife might put the kibosh on having a twelve-foot beer can in our back yard, but she immediately saw the appeal of it and was almost as excited as I was. That’s why I love her. All I need now is five more like-minded people. I took a bunch more photos of it in Boston, and you can see them here.
 

gallery

For many more photos of the Can Sleep camping beer can, including a promotional video, visit the photo gallery.
 

Victory In Alabama

By

This is great news. The Alabama governor, Bob Riley, signed HB373, the Gourmet Beer Bill, into law this morning. Alabamans can immediately begin enjoying beer that’s above 6% a.b.v., as the new bill raised the limit to 13.9%. Still no Utopias or Samichlaus, but it’s a great step forward. The hops are finally free! Congratulations to the Free the Hops organization and all the hard work that went into this over the past four years.

 

If Bud Tasted Like Goose Island Honkers Ale

By

The following video was sent to me by a Bulletin reader and fellow blogger (thanks Dave). He writes at Deadpan, Inc., where he creates and produces lots of videos like this one on a variety of topics. It’s pretty funny, I imagine especially so for brewers Will and Greg at Goose Island Brewing.
 

 
I spoke to a friend I know on the inside at A-B who told me it’s actually only weekly that these tastings are done. It’s known as the “Corporate Taste Panel” and is apparently a huge deal for the individual breweries who are essentially pitted against one another. How well a specific location’s beer does effects employee promotions and raises. He told me it can’t be overstated how important these tastings are. Each quarter one brewery is awarded the “Brewmaster’s Cup” based primarily on how well their Bud and Bud Light did in these taste panels. The scores are tabulated using only the group known as the “Key Tasters,” which consists of the VP of Brewing and roughly another half dozen members of the Brewing Senior Management Group. Brands other than the two flagships are tasted by a different group on “Junior Panels.” It is so important that after the “weekly standard package” tasting, brewery employees usually stay well past quitting time to learn the results of the tastings.

That’s an interesting peek into the corporate culture at Anheuser-Busch. Given that their goal is to produce products that taste the same regardless of where they’re made, it certainly seems like this would be an effective way to do that. Still, that video made me laugh out loud.

 

Dismissing Beer

By

The SFoodie, Tamara Palmer, at SF Weekly just released her choices for the 10 Coolest Specialty Food and Drink Magazines. I have no real quibble with her choices, even considering I don’t know a number of the food magazines that made the list. Two publications that write about beer are there. The first, Imbibe, usually has something about beer in every issue though its focus is on all beverages. It came in at #3. The other one, DRAFT, is the only beer-only magazine to make the list, and it is #5. As I said, I have no quibble with either choice, a prety good showing for both rags. I’ve written for DRAFT, though not Imbibe (I have spoken to their editor about pitching something, but haven’t done anything about it yet).

Anyway, I should disclose that I’m probably overly sensitive about these sorts of things, but it definitely ruffles my feathers when other writers, and especially food or wine writers, write uncharitably about beer in somewhat dismissive tones, even when they’re trying not to, as if they can’t help themselves. That seems to be the case here, as Palmer writes in her description of DRAFT magazine. “Beer is not usually something you think of as classy.” Really, why was that qualification necessary? She lives in San Francisco, the birthplace of the modern craft beer movement. There are countless good beer bars, and most here have at least an okay selection that includes more than just the macros. Then there are more than a few restaurants starting to embrace beer. Slanted Door, Millennium, and, of course, the Cathedral Hill Hotel, to name just a few. And look at the great job 21st Amendment, Magnolia, Thirsty Bear and Alembic have done with their menus. How could a food writer miss entirely SF Beer Week? With 155 events over ten days, including over two dozen beer dinners and another 25 or so beer and food pairing events at such places as Oliveto and Chez Panisse, for chrissakes. Surely, she couldn’t have missed the giant beer tent at Slow Food Nation last August at Fort Mason. San Francisco isn’t just some podunk town when it comes to beer, but everywhere you look you see local and better craft and imported beers. So how do you inhabit that space and not be touched by it, dismissing it at the stroke of a pen. I find it just so incredibly frustrating. I see so many people committed to raising the status of beer beyond mere commodity, pouring their life’s blood into it to no apparent effect whatsoever. I mean what exactly do the craft beer brewers, the better beer bars, and the beer savvy chefs at restaurants embracing beer have to do to attract the notice of someone whose very job is about food and drinks?

In the end, Palmer does admit “Draft gives the craft its due as a refined art,” but then why was it so necessary to first dismiss beer as being perceived as unrefined. I understand that many people do see it that way, but haven’t we or can’t we move past that yet, especially among the class of people charged with telling people what are the best things to eat and drink and where one can have the best experiences doing both? I have. Most beer aficionados, wine makers, and a growing number of chefs have moved beyond such antiquated thinking. Why is parity so damn difficult? I think I’ve been working too much lately. I’m getting crabbier than usual, and for me that’s saying something. I need a nap.

 

Stupid Is As Stupid Does

By

Today, the Senate Finance Committee released a 41-page report entitled Financing Comprehensive Health Care Reform: Proposed Health System Savings and Revenue Options.

When looking it over, one can’t help being reminded of the aphorism so often spouted by Forest Gump in Winston Groom’s wonderful anti-war novel of the same name: “stupid is as stupid does.” Essentially it’s a variation of similar sayings stretching back to at least the 14th century, where “x’ is as “x” does. What it means is simply that appearances don’t matter as much as deed and actions. In the example “beauty is as beauty does” it means that a person blessed with good looks is not beautiful unless the person’s beautiful inside, that is their actions make them a beautiful person. In Groom’s aphorism, he means that if someone does something incredibly stupid, then they’re a stupid person. In the case of the novel, Groom was seemingly an idiot, but in reality his actions belied that impression. [For the record, the film sucked, but the book is a work of genius; wonderful language, a dark comedy with a strong antiwar message that was neutered by the feel good film.] In the case of the Senate’s stupid actions today, they’ve shown that appearing to do something is far more important than actually doing anything effective or meaningful. Again, as I wrote last week, it comes down to what’s the best strategy for staying in office.

So what might lead me to so emphatically call the U.S. Senate’s actions stupid? In their proposal they’re advising that the federal excise tax on beer, currently $18 per barrel, be raised to $45, nearly tripling it. This came out of suggestions made at the Senate round table which I discussed last week. Here’s the language of the proposal, which begins at page 34:

SECTION IV: Lifestyle Related Revenue Raisers

Impose a Uniform Alcohol Excise Tax

Current Law

An excise tax is imposed on all distilled spirits, wine, and beer produced in, or imported into, the United States. The tax liability legally comes into existence the moment the alcohol is produced or imported but payment of the tax is not required until a subsequent withdrawal or removal from the distillery, winery, brewery, or, in the case of an imported product, from customs custody or bond.

Both the tax rates and the volumetric measures on which the taxes are imposed differ depending on the type of beverage. Taxes are lower on the alcohol content of beer and still wines than on the alcohol content of distilled spirits and naturally sparkling wines. Distilled spirits, wine, and beer produced or imported into the United States are taxed at the
following rates per specified volumetric measure:

On a per ounce basis, distilled spirits are taxed at roughly 21 cents per ounce of alcohol, still wines at 8 cents per ounce of alcohol (assuming an average alcohol content of 11 percent), and beer at 10 cents per ounce of alcohol (assuming an average alcohol content of 4.5 percent).

Proposed Option

This policy option contemplates imposing a uniform tax based on the alcohol content contained in the product. The excise tax under the proposal is imposed at a rate of $16 per proof gallon on all alcoholic beverages.62

As under present law, domestic wineries having aggregate annual production not exceeding 250,000 gallons would be entitled to a tax credit on the first 100,000 gallons of wine (other than champagne and other sparkling wines) removed in a calendar year. In a manner similar to present law, for domestic brewers producing less than two million barrels of beer during the calendar year, the proposal imposes a reduced rate of tax on the first 60,000 barrels of beer removed each year.

56 A “proof gallon” is a U.S. liquid gallon of proof spirits, or the alcoholic equivalent thereof. Generally a proof gallon is a U.S. liquid gallon consisting of 50 percent alcohol. On lesser quantities, the tax is paid proportionately. Credits are allowed for wine content and flavors content of distilled spirits. Sec. 5010.

57 Small domestic wine producers (i.e., those producing not more than 250,000 wine gallons in a calendar year) are allowed a credit of $0.90 per wine gallon ($0.056 per wine gallon in the case of hard cider) on the first 100,000 wine gallons (other than champagne and other sparkling wines) removed. The credit is reduced by one percent for each 1,000 wine gallons produced in excess of 150,000 wine gallons per calendar year.

58 A “wine gallon” is a U.S. gallon of liquid measure equivalent to the volume of 231 cubic inches. On lesser quantities, the tax is paid proportionately.

59 Sec. 5001(a)(4).

60 A small domestic brewer (one who produces not more than 2 million barrels in a calendar year) is subject to a per barrel rate of $7.00 on the first 60,000 barrels produced in that year.

61 A “barrel” contains not more than 31 gallons, each gallon equivalent to the volume of 231 cubic inches. On lesser quantities, the tax is paid proportionately.

62 Because the rate of tax will not depend on the source of the alcohol, the section 5010 credit based on wine content and flavors content of distilled spirits is not necessary and would be eliminated under the proposal.

Because spirits would have its taxation changed the least, prices of wine and beer would skyrocket while liquor would remain almost the same. This would undoubtedly lead to increased sales for spirits and a disastrous sales drop off of wine, but especially beer, whose taxes would be raised the most.

The last time the federal excise tax on beer was raised, in 1991, when we in the midst of another recession, the economy bounced back but it took many years for the taxes collected on beer to return to the levels that were collected before 1991. And that was during the boom years of the Clinton administration, when we had a budget surplus. Remember those days? It makes a soiled dress seem positively quaint compared with what we’re facing today.

In Beer Business Daily’s newsletter this morning, “Jeff Becker of the Beer Institute points out that this increase would ‘threaten jobs, increase consumer costs for those least able to pay and jeopardize brewers, wholesalers, retailers, suppliers and related businesses that rely heavily on the beer industry. In 2008, members of the beer industry paid more than $41 billion in taxes at all levels of government and provided jobs to 1.9 million Americans. Any proposed tax increase would severely offset this important economic contribution.'”

And as Harry points out, even the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States (DISCUS), who in a sense has the most to gain (and has in the past supported tax equalization) should this proposal be enacted, is against it because “it would actually decrease tax revenue. ‘When the federal excise tax on spirits was raised in 1991,’ writes DISCUS, ‘tax revenues actually fell and it took 10 years before they regained their pre-1991 levels. If the tax revenue history is any guide, and the end result is hundreds of thousands more unemployed workers, you have to ask yourself what is the point?'”

Indeed, that is the question, what’s the point? Why would the Senate propose to essentially wipe out an industry to raise 0.008% of the funds needed for a $1.5 trillion health care initiative? Why would they ignore history? Why would they knowingly put forth a proposal that so obviously would lead to more unemployment, to a reduction in tax revenues (instead of raising more) and would regressively effect the poorest Americans.

I also have to laugh at the doublespeak of calling this “Lifestyle Related Revenue,” which is, one supposes, the new less politically charged way of calling it a sin tax. But it’s the same thing. If your “lifestyle” includes enjoying alcoholic beverages, then you will be punished with additional taxes, never mind that moderate consumption has been shown time and time again to have health benefits. You can’t call it lifestyle based, impose more taxation, and not have it have negative associations. It just sounds nicer, and confuses people into thinking it’s not as nasty as it is in reality.

I know this is just still a proposal, but last week we said it was just a round table and here we are only a few days later and now it’s a proposal. Who knows how fast this will move. Politicians tend to reflexively act in knee-jerk ways that give the appearance of action but with little thought to long term consequences. It’s how they — as Mel Brooks so eloquently put it in Blazing Saddles — protect their phony baloney jobs. And in this case, the long term consequences seem very dire indeed. There’s very little pay off, almost none really, and it seems obvious to anyone paying attention that the possibility of a chain reaction that would decimate the industry is very, very real. If that’s not just plain stupid, I don’t know what is.

 

Thanks again to Harry Schumacher and his Beer Business Daily. If you don’t already subscribe, and beer is your business, you should consider subscribing to Harry’s daily e-mail newsletter.

 

Cap Dog Art

By

Finally back after a day of being locked out of the Bulletin due to a combination of a weird glitch and slow customer support, and this fun piece of art just in from Sea Dog Brewing in Maine. Robert Cochrane, presumably a local artist, created a large piece of art depicting Barney, the Sea Dog logo and mascot, using only crowns, or bottle caps. Here are photos of it, which are posted on Sea Dog’s Facebook page. Apparently the original is at their newest location in South Portland, Maine. I’ve featured art here before using crowns, but never one done specifically for a brewery. Pretty cool.

 

Barney as Cap Dog.

Artist Robert Cochrane.

A close-up of the artwork.

 

Beer In Art #28: Jos Van De Ven’s Still Life With Beer Bottle

By

Today’s work of art, while thoroughly modern, is painted in a style reminiscent of the old masters by Dutch artist Jos Van De Ven. Van De Ven’s work featured today is entitled Still Life With Beer Bottle and Book.

 

The work is done in oil, and measures 61 x 46 cm, roughly 18 x 24 in. The artist himself describes the painting:

When I was in Lithuania, I found the little painting you can see on the wall in the background. It is a typical landscape of that area. The cup in the foreground is a Russian antique and the old handmade beer bottle is French. In order to see the shadows on the wall, I used a light background. Here again, I had to use a white cloth on the shelf in order to create a balance with the light wall.

So Van De Ven paints in the style of old Dutch masters, and here’s why:

Technique for the sake of technique and for showing off a kind of virtuosity may create some “wow”, but to my mind it has no real value. A painting has to be an illusion with a soul, not an exact replica of reality. Photography can do that much better.

That’s why I like the art of painting. The artist can create something, using reality as a tool, that a photographer may never be able to do. They can create their own light, mix colours that may not really exist, or forms that would be difficult to find in the real world. A painting is the product of an artist’s fantasy or imagination, giving them the opportunity to create their own universe. The artist can make a painting “come alive”.

As much as I enjoy painting classical still lifes, I strive to give them a contemporary touch. For instance, in the 17th century, the interior of houses were dark because of all the wood paneling on the walls and the small windows. That’s often reflected in the still lifes of the time, particularly in the dark brown colour schemes and sparse lighting. But I want my still lifes to he fresh, full of life and light, with vivid colours I want them to be alive, to show that simple things in life have a right to exist, too. As such, I use many of the best classical techniques but with a modern day spin.

And here’s a biography of the artist, from his website:

Jos Van De Ven is a modern artist with a classically inspired style who considers painting to be an adventure and a search for conceptual communication. Currently he likes to express a peaceful state of mind using objects in a timeless setting. At the heart of his work is the play and poetry of light and color. His work may be “still”, but it is alive.
“The richness of life lies within sincerity, elegance and a bit of mystery: I like my paintings to reflect states of being and my quest towards a better comprehension of man and his nobility, and that they open a window for those who know how to look beyond appearances”, says Jos Van De Ven.

His artistic journey has taken many twists and turns. In his younger days, he was devotee of the French Impressionists until he met Salvador Dali at his home in Spain. Jos was only 23 at the time. He continued with surrealism until he felt the need to break loose, painting in a totally abstract way, wild, uncontrolled, very colourful. Still not happy with his work, Jos studied art in Spain after which he felt revitalised. Unfortunately, due to various circumstances in his life at the time, he stopped painting for a while.

Years later, Jos picked up his paint brushes again, but did not know what to paint. He had changed and was looking for something that would allow him to express what he wanted say with his art. He became interested in the techniques of the Old Masters and turned to Dutch painter, Cornelis LeMair, for guidance. Under his tutelage, Jos experimented with a variety of traditional materials and approaches. His work took on another form. He liked the traditional techniques but wanted to give his paintings a more contemporary look. Now he has a definite signature and is very much appreciated.

Jos shows regularly at galleries throughout the Netherlands, France, the USA and elsewhere. His work is included in numerous collections and he regularly receives commissions from an international clientele.

His sister, Monique Van De Ven, is a well-known actress in The Netherlands and his daughter, Nadia Van De Ven, is an actress who recently started working in Hollywood. She’s been on Days of Our Lives and an episode of “ER.” She even has a MySpace page.

If you want to learn more about the artist, you’re on your own, unfortunately. Apart from his own website, there’s not much else out there about his work.