Many people refuse to believe that a photograph is art. The fact that the comparative time it takes to make a photograph (anywhere from an hour+ to 1/1000 of a second) to a painting or a drawing (hours, days, months, years) makes people think that there's nothing to it. Also the accessibility of cameras "makes everyone an artist." This, to me, sounds like a really dangerous notion. while i believe it's important that anyone who feels a call to art explore that call, to believe that one is an artist just because they own an artistic utensil is a little ridiculous. I own several pencils, but i would never assume i can draw like Michelangelo, you know?
Like I've said many times before in the blog, it's the moment you choose to press the shutter - the decision of what's in the frame, the instant, or instants, captured. What you choose that you want to remember...photographing a happy moment as opposed to a sad one, taking a photograph of the souffle that made it as opposed to the 3 failures that preceded it.
France, like many told me it would and liked i expected, is starting to fade out the bad memories. I remember being upset, but i'm now thinking only about the people i met and liked, Marie-Claire, the (seeming) several million patisseries and boulangeries that i ate in, my trip to italy...it's nice. It seems that my brain is choosing the moments to take pictures of for me. it's nice. less things i have to think about.
one thing i would like to have a photograph: when i succeeded in unclogging my toilet with dish soap and almost boiling water. twice. Another thing i would have liked to photograph is the dinner i made tonight: tofu with peanut sauce, neatly cut cucumber and carrots, sprouts, cabbage leaves, and rice with rice vinager. my friend matt came over and shared it with me.
gallery world is still amazing. check out the website i'm helping to maintain! www.davidweinberggallery.com
(shot at the top of the post is from a shoot i did last friday!)
in other random news - i participated in my first gallery opening on friday. I think i poured over 15 bottles of wine in the course of like...3 hours. whoopie! it was really fun. I think for this show that we're doing, "Golden Ratio," my fav artist up is Carter Hodgkin. She simulates particle explosions and creates art out of them. Art and math in happy union!
if you guys do check out the sites and have any questions (even if it's: why would anyone make something like this?) please please please leave them in the comments section. Art is so much more enjoyable when you know about it!
6 comments:
I like Carter Hodgkin's work too. It's pretty to look at and very light-hearted in feeling. I love the mathematical feel of it too, with spirals etc.
I also like your photo. And dinner sounds yummy...
Love,
YVLM
I'm pretty much in love with this photo - the colors, the attitude, the fact that she's so relaxed...it comes together so beautifully.
As for the fading out of the crap stuff - could that explain why I remember *so little* of Prague these days? :-p I agree though, it definitely happens.
Hey there,
Long time no see or speak! Glad to see that you're enjoying Chicago. I love the colors in the photo for this entry!
- tamgelb
Hi,
I am simply amazed at this picture, I would like to suggest a title: "Happy!"
I think the whole picture somehow radiates. The colors, the pose, the whole composition is just perfect, and I think it is art!
As far as the gallery show, I have a few comments:
Amanda Hughen: very pretty, reminds me a little of the beautiful chandeliers in the Metropolitan Opera.
Carter Hodkin, pretty and interesting.
Scott Gruss: Why? and why is this art?
Andrew Graham: Pleasing pattern for a shirt, or maybe drapes, but why is it art?
Love to see that you are having a good time!
Love G&G
to grandpa:
Scott Gruss: Why? and why is this art?
i had the same exact question when i saw his work. granted, the digital reproductions on the site do leave out detail.
scott's work is mainly about the process he took to get there. most of them are meditations - just repetitive motions to acheive subtle results.
for example, one of his peices is a black square, and a white square. relatively small. however, they are both completely covered, but in 2 different ways. the black square is layers and layers of graphite that, in the end, creates this actually really beautiful subtle texture. the white one is completely opposite - built up from a powdery substance called gesso - he applied it and sanded it down to create a perfectly smooth texture. his art is one that's subtle, process oriented, and medatative. interesting to look at, weirdly enough.
Andrew Graham: Pleasing pattern for a shirt, or maybe drapes, but why is it art?
andrew's work is more located in the idea behind it...he takes guitar music, assocites each note with a color, and then paints the music. the thin stripes relate more to his experience with painting - he describes it as a repetitive and precise process. his art does show this, but it's not as interesting to me.
Does grandpa look at or better put feel art? Well I would say no to looking, seeing, being still for a moment. Feeling art, yes that is for sure in the comments left. It provoked quick stuffy remarks, so I guess the art is doing its job, bringing out thoughts and feelings that have been bottled up. Carried around through out their days frustrated at them selves for not taking time to reflect on matters of their own life but to stay with the fast paced reactions and the words that follow an uncertain ego.
Maybe try slowing down and let stillness tell you something .
Cheers.
Post a Comment