Lecture #6- Alexandre Singhe Response

·      The most interesting quote Alexadre Singe lecture was where he compare drug production with alchemy, in particular meth production. I think this could be used across the board with the creation of any drug, legal or designer. It is this effort to create a substance that can cure, dampen, erect whatever you desired effect that drives both one for gold or the universal solvent the other for something that is worth its weight in gold. It is more over the form of learning that would particularly parallel alchemy in that there is no formal school no institute it is taught individually from teacher to apprentice.

·      I would describe Singhe’s work an experiential, psychological, and aware.

·      I was unaware of the physical nature of this performances, I believe that it would be in slide form not transparencies that must be changed manually. It was this physical element that makes a performance a unique event in junction with its unscripted nature.

·      I did not have any specific question because I found that it was hard to find concrete examples of his work just the discussion. I just wondered how all these various groups of subject matter interplayed together, and what the underlying connection between his groups of work. To be honest, I’m still confused. I guess it is the interplay between fantasy and reality that remained unchanging between the talk to installation of talking everyday objects.

·      The most compelling piece of work was his performance itself. It has a life of its own and challenges the role and practice of fine art. Although his collages and images may be viewed individually they are connected and brought to life with Singhe’s dialogue. The art isn’t really in the images, but in the reactions and consequences that result from the story uniting the images. That is the most powerful element.

Exhibition #4 "The PreRaphaelite Len" Response

The exhibition, “The Pre Raphaelite Lens; British Photograph and Paint, 1848-1875”, surrounds the shared language that formed between early British photographers and the current painters of that era, reflecting the intrinsic relationship between the two groups. The Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, a group of painters who wanted to return to the purity and clarity of the paintings of the Medieval and Renaissance period preceding Raphael, became spurred on by the detail that the new medium of photograph could capture in a moment. In turn early photographers struggling to establish their new media as fine art some looked to the visual strategies and subject matter of the Pre-Raphaelite painting as the answer. The two groups began to venture on with the questioning of representation and observation in art constantly taking and giving to one another both literally and figuratively. This interplay between the two media is physically shown both in the grouping of work by shared theme such as natural world or literature, and the actual placement of the work in that paintings and photographs are intermingled together indiscriminantly.

The concept behind the exhibition was most directly shown in the grouping of three pieces of work under the literary section. All three depict a scene from Tennyson’s poem “Marianna” based off Shakespeare’s “Measure for Measure”, in which Marianna is anxiously waiting the return of her betrothed while he is out making trouble. The two photographs are works by Julia Margaret Cameron and Henry Peach Robinson while the painting is produced by John Everett Millais all of which are titled “Mariana”. All of the artist employ the use of the figure’s posture and expression to convey the tension and anxiety of the figure, Cameron and Robison having the model slump to one side supporting their head or pillowing it while Millais figure is standing up and twisting to stretch as if she had previously been nervously perched over her embroidery. Their faces are tight with tension or lost in thought, Millais and Robinson the former while Cameron’s model stares vacantly out of frame and Robinson looks as she is looking at someone off to the side and about to say something . Cameron’s work depends solely on this use of position and expression to tell the story, as it is a medium shot with no backdrop as with much of her other work because of the severely small depth of field, and one prop that looks ambiguous. The long haired girl lays her head on her arm fallen to one side she looks off camera at nothing, but her face shows worry and her body weariness with her tangled hair and deep set eyes so one may look upon it as a universal portrait of all women wearily waiting for their lover to return from where they are not supposed to be. Much like Cameron, Robinson background means nothing although it is visible the drapery gives away the location as in studio nothing more, as well as that for this instance he only used one negative for this composition unlike many of pieces of his work. Although he relies on body language Robinson also uses props in order to solidify this expression of anxiety using a crucifix as Marianna’s objects of comfort that is clutched in her hands. Unlike Cameron and Millais whom use their costuming of the figure to recreate an Mideval scene by placing their models in period dresses, Robinson does not concentrate on the recreation of the Shakespearian feel. Instead his model seems to be wearing civil war era clothing; so modern for the time it was taken. Instead of a literary Marianna Robinson seems to be creating a looser interpretation of Marianna possibly to parallel the story with current time or universalize the scene so that everyone can access the emotion. Millais painting is obviously distinct from the two flanking photographs in that is in a full range of color, and of course is oil on panel. It is a full framed composition with Marianna standing in front of a table placed before a stained glass window of the holy family with an altar shadowed in he background, unlike both photographs the details remain firm through the block on the back wall even if at times it breaks up into multiple brush strokes. The amount of costuming and props far surpasses both photos with her green embroidered dress with her hair in a bun, and her table bursting forth with materials, the stained glass glowing and the marriage altar in the back surrounded by dark shadows, it becomes full in a the photographs are not. Through studying both the obvious and subtle similarities in these three work in particular, but the exhibition as whole it become perfectly clear the mutual relationship that was formed through mutual competition and integration of these two groups 

Exhibition #5 Sally Mann at VMFA Response

            The exhibition “Sally Mann: The Flesh and the Spirit” organizing Mann’s images in thematic and formal groups rather than chronicling her work, emphasizing her new work rather than looking back. In all of the sections of work, Mann “uses the local and intimate for universal meaning.” often using the body as a powerful canvas for expression. Her images also explore and ponder the human experience through the whole spectrum of life.  Her more recent work utilizes alternative processes from wet plate (used in the last decade particularly) to Polaroid to platinum adding another element to her compositions, unintentional distortion. This addition creates a new interplay in her work between the physical nature of the media she is using and the physical nature of the body reaping more of an internal sense of the subject.

            The viewer is first greeted and parted with a set of multiple self-portraits inset in Warhol style grid pattern that read like windows. All of the tightly cropped images have Mann’s face pressed close to the glass as if she whispers and peers into a box (the camera) of answers, or a mirror. The eyes are almost always present though they may be closed or have distortion over them while other peer or probe into the viewer. Although the distortion is not intentional it plays the role of giving the images the aesthetic of an internal search or a mind bubbling as it tries to return to equilibrium. The brush strokes often show through ranging from slopped on, to aggressive but thin, others smooth but distorted, etc. conveying the emotion of the hand that created it. Her choice of wet plate media that causes these textural distortions also lends honesty to the portraits in that the long exposure time does not allow one to pose or stay in one place, the medium must catch a fleeting but uncreated personna.  This process also making each photograph a one of kind creation rising from the meeting of the artist’s body and mind with the body of the medium.

Two rooms over, the viewer is confronted with large scale closely cropped highly distorted portraits of Mann’s children now grown, a body of work entitled “What Remains”. Immediately one can recognize these images are differ vastly to those of their childhood. Now gone are the open faces and adventures of their childhood as included in a room to the side, replaced by worn and rocky faces of adults partially hidden with distortion. The distortion separates view from subject, but only partially almost to allow the viewer to think they are beginning to gain access only to have the rest of the person, the landscape blocked or denied. These distortions may represent a mother’s forced separation from her children as they mature, or simply Mann’s acceptance that time will thwart any effort to gain clarity when trying to capture a living thing. There is a sadness that individuates itself from the sadness felt in the self-portraits in its immensity and the particular feel of mourning. Many of the faces resemble death portraits or masks such as “Emmett #42” and “Virginia #42” while others look resentful at being trapped or transforming, but this death is not final it is just the death of the child within us as we age that Christian Boltanski is often speaking about. With this death, the openness of childhood is destroyed replaced with the closed secretive faces of adults, most poignantly felt by the mother’s who become locked out.

Mann, like all mothers must accept the death of the old relationship with her children, and come to terms with the new. This is the effort that unites these two separate bodies of work. On one hand, she must let separate from her children through accepting the end of the old relationship of their old selves, the end to the accessibility she had when they were with her and that the ephemeral nature of life will affects her children too, in “What Remains”, all the while having to reform her identity to be able to live without the roles and rewards of early motherhood, becoming independent of her children, but searching where to start as is stated in the explanation “these images signal a change in Mann’s identity” with her self portraits deep introspection. The shared formal qualities such as the use of the same process, inclusion of eyes and framing suggest a flimsy relationship while the concept of impermanence’s affect on those around us seals the two together and with many other bodies of Mann’s work that is presented such as “Proud Flesh” in the face of changing subject matter and size. The faces of herself, and her children become the expression of the forced transformation caused by impermanence and time. 

Lecture #3 Cyprien Gaillard and Mario Garcia Torres Response

            In the exhibition “Directions: Cyprien Gaillard and Mario Garcia Torres” both artists are described as conceptual artists “that examine architectural and artistic “ruins” of the recent past.” (Hirschorn). Gaillard is said to capture the disintegration of the tangible objects that exemplify utopian ideal of rationality that created physical structures that seemingly lack a human element in both photography and film. Torres presents still images in the form of a traditional slide show to inquire about art’s permanence. He presents the finds of his expedition to the Grapevine Manor in St. Croix with the intention of documenting the mosaics of the late Daniel Buren as he had explored many other avant-garde artists. He found the mosaics and the hotel in a state of advanced deterioration, walls collapsing and nature creeping in.

            As you approach the large tables of glass museum cases and peer into to top at Gaillard’s still images, you feel like you are looking at sets of butterfly wings or pieces of paper in a museum. Each Polaroid is placed into a diamond grid along with other images related by location, form, etc set in a curved piece of matte board. The subjects matter varies from parks, bridges, graveyards, neighborhoods, architecture, etc., but always concentrating on the objects people put faith into to be a permanent reminder of ideals or people they wanted to preserve. The repetition, size and placement reminds us that these objects often fail in their primary purpose because they slowly become forgotten and disappear from memory and then the physical world. All of these elements cause the objects documented to become not individual images of objects, but one form caught not in one place but in the single state of being swept away with time. The compositions often place modern and antiquated objects and architecture together as if to say that our modern ideals and structures are no different in their fate.

            Walking into Torres’ installation, you are presented with two projectors clicking in unison, and a vinyl record player emitting a relaxed music track that then falls away into the voice of the artist telling the story of the hotel that his body of work concentrates on. One projector cycles through the images Torres captured of the crumbling walls, and abandoned objects and places he found during his visit to the hotel while the other cycles though but repeats as single image of the hotel during it’s prime with people smiling and lounging around the pool overlooking the beach. The single shot repeating representing the glorified version of the hotel, the memories of the people who were there is the only thing that will be the only thing that does not change (after we leave a place it begins to change). The second projector cycles through images of a place transforming; showing the ephemeral nature of the objects we would believe should last as a hotel devoid of guest becomes a part of the landscape either through decomposition, or being overtaken. This statement is epitomized by the juxtaposition of two images of the pool one full of water and life the other empty in all contexts.

            Although Gaillard’s still image creations, and Torres’ slideshow differ at the basic level of medium, Polaroid versus slide film, and that the subject matter differs in that Gaillard gathers many locations while Torres concentrates on the demise of one place, there are similarities. Both document the objects that we believe will last particularly architecture as well as using media that are slowly descending into antiquity. Another way they are similar in that they both use repetition but in diverse ways. Gaillard uses the sheer number of images to imitate the ambiguity objects fall into as a result of time as they do in actuality while Torres uses repitition in two ways. In one instance showing the unique permanent nature of memory associated with location and in the other showing the ravages of time on a physical structure without the protection of human intervention. Lastly, the two contrast in that Gaillard concentrates solely on the process of decompositional transformation while Torres’ work encompasses the continuous nature of time recognizing the existence of the island before and after the hotel.