While reading this essay, I started thinking as soon as I read the opening paragraph. The idea that "the birth of the reader must be at the cost of the death of the Author" is a fantastic one and really made me thing about the real disassociation between the physical artist or author of a piece of work and the person reading it hundred, or even just a year ago. We don't understand most of how our brains work never mind the minds of others.
The question of the hour is: Is the result of a piece of work (whether art, literature, music etc.) biased to the creator? This idea was present throughout the reading "Death of an Author" and it made me start thinking. Going through school, we have been handed books that are "classics". Books like Hamlet, The Great Gatsby, Great Expectation, Catcher in the Rye, etc. But what determines these books so great, and if they are so great, why do so many people dislike them. Many critics of these books will often say they appreciate the quality of the language, but not the meaning or subject. That's like saying someone likes the colors of your art piece, but not the actual piece itself. But what really goes on in the mind of the critic. Do they genuinely dislike the content of a piece of art/literature or could do they just not understand and therefore find it unappealing. Especially today, as a society we have a tendency to always want to be right and understand. This was a problem and continues to be a problem with much abstract art. When we are posed with an image that presents unrecognizable forms, when we are left to decipher a jumble of color (or no color), lines and shapes, how can one's opinion not be influenced by their frustration. I have experienced this feeling myself when looking at art. Many times people have thought one thing and then the artist tells them their reasonings and it's different. And when they don't match up, or one can not decipher the piece at all, most people will end up putting the blame on the beholder. There have been instances where I have thought a piece of art or literature to be "stupid" or "not interesting" simply because I could not understand.
As humans we not only like to shift negative attention off of ourselves but we also want to appear more intelligent than the next person, as it is seen as "richer" and classier. These feelings aren't always conscious either. Many times we subconsciously feel this way and it feels natural to express it. Therefore, with all these different factors, it's hard to know the real reason behind a negative critique of an artist's or author's work. And it becomes especially difficult with time. As the age of a piece grows (essentially after the death of the author or artist), the true reasonings behind the work become more obscure. As more people study a piece, critique it, perform it or translate it, the more it gets shaped into something different than the author or artist most likely intended. And as a work stands vacant of the creator, the work becomes an extension of them. The piece transforms from "what is this piece about?" but to "why did the creator do this?" Many creators of art or literature, for example Edgar Allen Poe or Van Gogh, were said to have mental illnesses. I'm not saying that this is untrue, however life is a game of telephone. Many mental illnesses, especially just 50 years ago when technology was much more limited, are diagnosed by doctors based off of suggested signs common to the disease. Therefore, a diagnosis, especially back in say Hamlet's time where the smallest difference in behavior became extreme, begins as a bias. And from there, connotations associated with certain illnesses will create more bias and as research and the human mind develops, so do the diseases, thus forming another bias. Therefore, this is just another example of how an artist or author can be labeled and critiqued off of his work and the people who are just trying to comprehend it or think they comprehend it and release their biases (along with the biases they already have towards certain subjects, styles, or time periods) against what the original intent may have been. This is why I sometimes think of art, music, literature and other forms of documented creativity as timeless sculpture because the ever-changing world and societal influences and rotation of new people with new minds and ideas will constantly morph a piece into their own thoughts and opinions. And there will always be a critic who tries to make those ideas morph the "image" of a man that no one alive now has ever even seen, not alone talked to.
Wednesday, December 17, 2014
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
American Suburb X
Antoine D'Agata:
"Look at the muck, at the tar… at the black, at the ash, at the junk in his head… I think that I can see inside of his mind, but I can’t… I can only see the evidence, I can only see the art. I can see the mind as a print, as a pixel. Does the work reflect the man? Does the man reflect the work? Does the man serve as a symbol for the work or does the work serve as a symbol for the man? Who is leading who? Who tells the truth, who is the liar? Either way, it is beautiful." (http://www.americansuburbx.com/2009/03/antoine-dagata-is-empty-shell-walking.html)
As I was scrolling through the works of the photographers on this website I can across Antoine D'Agata and was, well, interested and confused to say the least. His works were filled with lust and expression and filled with passion and suffering and so much more all at once. They are as the quote above says, beautiful. But what intrigued me most about this article about D'Agata's works was the questioning of his mental state to his artwork. Was he really a dissatisfied artist feeding his inner demons through his photographs? Or was he simply just an artist choosing to express his emotions and the emotions of others through his morphing, seducing images. But, the broader question here is "Does the work reflect the man?" or "Does the man reflect the work?" As artists, we choose to visually capture and express our feeling, thoughts, ideas and opinions and just hope that others understand our internal point of view. And it doesn't always work. People easily misinterperate an artist's vision all the time, and why? Is it that people take visual representations and transform it into something they believe, or do the works of an artist project things that subconsciously the artist was thinking but didn't intend. Would this make the work a reflection of the mind of the artist himself, or do the ideas brought upon the work by outsiders then project onto the artist themselves to a point where they adapt those ideas or characteristics? Just some thoughts.
Sally Mann:
The second piece that I watched was a short video about Sally Mann's series Proud Flesh. I have always enjoyed this series and hearing her explain more about it definitely made the series more antiquous as she say explains as well as emotional. The expressive process of Wet-plate processing really emphasizes the emotion and idea of maintaining strength through a difficult illness that her husband had. What also struck to me in this video was her explanation for the title of the series. Proud flesh, as she explains, is a layer of ugly, fragile layer of skin that forms before the scar tissues on a horse. Although her pieces appear to show that Larry Mann was still proud of his body even as is weakened, the works were more about his strength yet fragility. The title gives the piece an almost double-meaning. This got me thinking about how a title of a piece or series can tie a certain context, emotion or idea to the images. Calling a series World War II is going to give a more specific feeling than if it were top just be titled Warfare. Or, more abstract titles that can give the viewers more flexibility to form their own emotions or connections to a specific image. The last thing this video talks about briefly is the happy accidents that Sally Mann received from her wet-plate processing. I really like the idea of happy accidents because although you can frame and stage everything just the way you want it, there is always the opportunity for something to slip through the eye of the photographer that makes a picture just the smallest or largest amount more intriguing or successful.
http://www.americansuburbx.com/2011/02/asx-tv-sally-mann-from-lens-to-photo-sally-mann-captures-her-love-2011.html
"Look at the muck, at the tar… at the black, at the ash, at the junk in his head… I think that I can see inside of his mind, but I can’t… I can only see the evidence, I can only see the art. I can see the mind as a print, as a pixel. Does the work reflect the man? Does the man reflect the work? Does the man serve as a symbol for the work or does the work serve as a symbol for the man? Who is leading who? Who tells the truth, who is the liar? Either way, it is beautiful." (http://www.americansuburbx.com/2009/03/antoine-dagata-is-empty-shell-walking.html)
As I was scrolling through the works of the photographers on this website I can across Antoine D'Agata and was, well, interested and confused to say the least. His works were filled with lust and expression and filled with passion and suffering and so much more all at once. They are as the quote above says, beautiful. But what intrigued me most about this article about D'Agata's works was the questioning of his mental state to his artwork. Was he really a dissatisfied artist feeding his inner demons through his photographs? Or was he simply just an artist choosing to express his emotions and the emotions of others through his morphing, seducing images. But, the broader question here is "Does the work reflect the man?" or "Does the man reflect the work?" As artists, we choose to visually capture and express our feeling, thoughts, ideas and opinions and just hope that others understand our internal point of view. And it doesn't always work. People easily misinterperate an artist's vision all the time, and why? Is it that people take visual representations and transform it into something they believe, or do the works of an artist project things that subconsciously the artist was thinking but didn't intend. Would this make the work a reflection of the mind of the artist himself, or do the ideas brought upon the work by outsiders then project onto the artist themselves to a point where they adapt those ideas or characteristics? Just some thoughts.
Sally Mann:
The second piece that I watched was a short video about Sally Mann's series Proud Flesh. I have always enjoyed this series and hearing her explain more about it definitely made the series more antiquous as she say explains as well as emotional. The expressive process of Wet-plate processing really emphasizes the emotion and idea of maintaining strength through a difficult illness that her husband had. What also struck to me in this video was her explanation for the title of the series. Proud flesh, as she explains, is a layer of ugly, fragile layer of skin that forms before the scar tissues on a horse. Although her pieces appear to show that Larry Mann was still proud of his body even as is weakened, the works were more about his strength yet fragility. The title gives the piece an almost double-meaning. This got me thinking about how a title of a piece or series can tie a certain context, emotion or idea to the images. Calling a series World War II is going to give a more specific feeling than if it were top just be titled Warfare. Or, more abstract titles that can give the viewers more flexibility to form their own emotions or connections to a specific image. The last thing this video talks about briefly is the happy accidents that Sally Mann received from her wet-plate processing. I really like the idea of happy accidents because although you can frame and stage everything just the way you want it, there is always the opportunity for something to slip through the eye of the photographer that makes a picture just the smallest or largest amount more intriguing or successful.
http://www.americansuburbx.com/2011/02/asx-tv-sally-mann-from-lens-to-photo-sally-mann-captures-her-love-2011.html
Final Project
For my final project, I searched countless photographers for some inspiration as I am not 100 percent sure on a specific "Idea" for it. However, I have a few things I look for when I go out to photograph or things I choose to photograph as I am going about in my daily life because it catches my eye. With these in mind, I found three photographers that use some similar ideas in their own works; Robert Adams, Ron Jude and Adam Bartos.
Robert Adams:
Robert Adams was a pioneer in landscape and nature photography as he chose to photograph the American West and it's ever-changing landscape through human interaction. This relates to some of my ideas as a photographer because I myself like to photography human-nature interaction as well as urban-nature contradictions. I enjoy the juxtapositions between brick walls, metal fences and other harsh, man-made structures intertwined with branches, vines, flowers, etc. I specifically enjoy places and images that showcase the idea of nature reclaiming it's own land. For example, when abandoned houses begin to degrade or telephone poles and houses are being consumed by vines. It makes for an interesting comment on the human vs. nature battle. Robert Adams chose to photograph similarly, but instead he showed the land being altered by human interaction and wanted to capture the beauty and essence that the landscapes still had. Robert Adams also has some of the best prints, I think. He knows how to keep tonality and contrast in harmony even in his night images. Although all of his images are striking, I personally resonate with his Cottonwoods trees project. Trees are something so simple and highly populated, they seem mundane to most people. Yet each tree is unique and I find the textures of barks and the twisting and bending of branches towards the sun to create interesting subjects just to look at.
Ron Jude:
I stumbled upon the photographer Ron Jude on the Americansuburbx website and was intrigued by a picture I saw of fire. Upon further exploration, I found many images that I found intriguing. Ron Jude is an American photographer who worked mostly in color. As I read about his work Lick Creek Line, I started to understand his philosophy about this images. He believes that photographs are a false sense of the past and that the more matter-of-fact an image is, the more distracting. He also likes to produce "straight" photographs that he sequences in ways that give the images more meaning. He also likes to create a first-person viewing experience and tries to create images that draws in a viewer and makes them feel as If they are the "character" in his narratives. These were the main reasons I was drawn to this photographer. He made me think about my own views of a photograph and how I don't necesarily like photographs that are flooded with intellectual meaning and hidden messages. I prefer images to have a context, whether it be the sequencing or just a title that makes an image convert into a specific meaning. I also enjoyed the nature and landscape elements that he has throughout his work. I enjoy that he photographs in non traditional areas such as Idaho in the middle of winter where he follows a trapper has he coldly goes about his job. Ron Jude explores"the gray line between documentation and fiction." This quote explains how he takes images in a more documentary setting but sequences them in a more cinematic, fictional way.
Adam Bartos:
The major reason why I found the works of Adam Bartos intriguing is because of his use of color, light and shadow. One thing that has always intrigued me, as well as many photographers, is how light hits a subject and creates shadows. I love looking at my dorm room around sunset because the light is directly across from my window and it creates long, harsh shadows. I also enjoy the subtle shadows an object can cast as well. I am mostly interested in how shadows from one object can appear on a different objects as well as shadows and highlights in less opaque objects such as water bottles, fabrics, etc. Adam Bartos' photographs have some play with shadows and on houses, other urban/suburban landscapes and objects. These images are the ones that intrigued me the most;
In conclusion:
These three photographers has inspired me to express my love of nature and portraiture for my final project as well as playing with shadows and just photographing the things that appeal to me and it will all fall together through common threads and sequencing. Here's a couple of images I have taken already as a sneak peak.
Websites Used:
http://www.adambartos.com/selection/los-angeles/
http://www.americansuburbx.com/channels
http://ronjude.com/lago
http://www.thegreatleapsideways.com/?ha_exhibit=fires-a-conversation-with-ron-jude
http://media.artgallery.yale.edu/adams/landing.php
Robert Adams:
Robert Adams was a pioneer in landscape and nature photography as he chose to photograph the American West and it's ever-changing landscape through human interaction. This relates to some of my ideas as a photographer because I myself like to photography human-nature interaction as well as urban-nature contradictions. I enjoy the juxtapositions between brick walls, metal fences and other harsh, man-made structures intertwined with branches, vines, flowers, etc. I specifically enjoy places and images that showcase the idea of nature reclaiming it's own land. For example, when abandoned houses begin to degrade or telephone poles and houses are being consumed by vines. It makes for an interesting comment on the human vs. nature battle. Robert Adams chose to photograph similarly, but instead he showed the land being altered by human interaction and wanted to capture the beauty and essence that the landscapes still had. Robert Adams also has some of the best prints, I think. He knows how to keep tonality and contrast in harmony even in his night images. Although all of his images are striking, I personally resonate with his Cottonwoods trees project. Trees are something so simple and highly populated, they seem mundane to most people. Yet each tree is unique and I find the textures of barks and the twisting and bending of branches towards the sun to create interesting subjects just to look at.
 |
| Berthoud, Colorado 1976 from Summer Nights |
 |
| Kerstin, Weld County, Colorado 1984 |
 |
| Longmount, Colorado 1973-4 from Cottonwoods |
I stumbled upon the photographer Ron Jude on the Americansuburbx website and was intrigued by a picture I saw of fire. Upon further exploration, I found many images that I found intriguing. Ron Jude is an American photographer who worked mostly in color. As I read about his work Lick Creek Line, I started to understand his philosophy about this images. He believes that photographs are a false sense of the past and that the more matter-of-fact an image is, the more distracting. He also likes to produce "straight" photographs that he sequences in ways that give the images more meaning. He also likes to create a first-person viewing experience and tries to create images that draws in a viewer and makes them feel as If they are the "character" in his narratives. These were the main reasons I was drawn to this photographer. He made me think about my own views of a photograph and how I don't necesarily like photographs that are flooded with intellectual meaning and hidden messages. I prefer images to have a context, whether it be the sequencing or just a title that makes an image convert into a specific meaning. I also enjoyed the nature and landscape elements that he has throughout his work. I enjoy that he photographs in non traditional areas such as Idaho in the middle of winter where he follows a trapper has he coldly goes about his job. Ron Jude explores"the gray line between documentation and fiction." This quote explains how he takes images in a more documentary setting but sequences them in a more cinematic, fictional way.
 |
| Ron Jude from Lick Creek Line |
 |
| Ron Jude from Other Nature |
 |
| Ron Jude from Lago |
 |
| Ron Jude from Lago |
Adam Bartos:
The major reason why I found the works of Adam Bartos intriguing is because of his use of color, light and shadow. One thing that has always intrigued me, as well as many photographers, is how light hits a subject and creates shadows. I love looking at my dorm room around sunset because the light is directly across from my window and it creates long, harsh shadows. I also enjoy the subtle shadows an object can cast as well. I am mostly interested in how shadows from one object can appear on a different objects as well as shadows and highlights in less opaque objects such as water bottles, fabrics, etc. Adam Bartos' photographs have some play with shadows and on houses, other urban/suburban landscapes and objects. These images are the ones that intrigued me the most;
 |
| Adam Bartos from Long Island |
 |
| Adam Bartos from Long Island |
 |
| Adam Bartos from Travel 1980-81 |
 |
| Adam Bartos from Yard Sale |
 |
| Adam Bartos from Los Angelos (I mostly just included this because it reminds of the underpass in Grease where they race and I love that movie) |
These three photographers has inspired me to express my love of nature and portraiture for my final project as well as playing with shadows and just photographing the things that appeal to me and it will all fall together through common threads and sequencing. Here's a couple of images I have taken already as a sneak peak.
Websites Used:
http://www.adambartos.com/selection/los-angeles/
http://www.americansuburbx.com/channels
http://ronjude.com/lago
http://www.thegreatleapsideways.com/?ha_exhibit=fires-a-conversation-with-ron-jude
http://media.artgallery.yale.edu/adams/landing.php
Wednesday, November 5, 2014
"Demonically" Brassai
Reading Tod Papageorge's Core Curriculum Essay about Brassai, has allowed me to think more openly about his work, as well as other artists. The essay proposed the idea of: Is the character of a Photographer influenced or altered by their work?
Tod Papagreorge's analysis of Brassai's character and nature of his work in this essay is directly based off of one word, "demonically", that Brassai uses in a letter home to his parents. Papageorge talks about how the use of this one word in a letter to his parents whom he loved, yet told to "love him blindly" because he did not wish to ever return home from Paris (even though his parent's funerals), describes why he chose to photograph the risqué Paris nightlife, instead of "regular" day time. Could his rebellion to stay in Paris to pursue his passions influence his photographs? Brassai did choose to photograph scenes or bars and nightclubs, lust, promiscuity, sexuality etc. And according to certain philosophers such as Freud, these subject matter could be directly related to a certain part of his brain, more specifically his Id. The Id of a person (according to Freud) is the part of your brain that is the "sinner". This part of your mind is what drives your passion, sexual intentions, curiosity etc. anything that supplies us with sincere pleasure in an unconscious way. According to this theory, Brassai's Id may have guided him to not only seek his passions in life (writing and photography in Paris) that gave him pleasure over being home, as well as came through in his images as they are filled with different subjects of pleasure or in the pursuit of pleasures and passion.
That being said, this could also just be an over-analysis. Brassai also served for the Austrian-Hungary calvary in 1917-1918 in WWI. He then moved to Paris to seek his passions and never to return home. This pursuit may have also been a response to working for WWI. No matter what the reasoning is however, we cannot deny that Brassai had a way of capturing Paris night life and some daytime scenes in a surreal, eerie way. He used long exposures with a flasbulb that, if didn't match perfectly, would create a less natural light which Brassai thought added to the straightforwardness of his photographs. Whether his words to his parents and work of art showcased "demonically" is accurate or not, his passion to follow his dreams and stay in Paris will always be an influence in the field of Photography.
Images of Brassai's work:
 |
| Streetwalker, Rue Quincampoix, c. 1931 |
 |
| `Un costume pour deux', Magic City c.1931 |
 |
| Couple d'Amoureau Assis, Bal Musette des Quatre Saisons, Rue de Lappe, c. 1932 |
Sources Referenced:
Brassai: Reflection on a Word - A talk at Yale by Tod Papageorge.
http://www.atgetphotography.com/The-Photographers/BRASSAI.html
http://www.romanianculture.org/personalities/Brassai.htm
http://www.houkgallery.com/artists/brassai/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)