Aristophanes
Well-known
Are all the postings here literature?
bobbyrab
Well-known
To me the first four entries are art works that happen to use photography as the means of recording rather than photography in the truest sense, the photograph is the culmination of meticulous preparation which is where the art lies. Any three of these artists could make the move to another media without straying too far from what they currently produce.
Have they been presented as such?
bobbyrab
Well-known
I probably haven't explained myself terribly well.
What I mean is if you were to describe their work to anyone unacquainted with it, saying they were photographers would not suffice, you would have to explain the prep work that was involved because 98% of the work is the preparation.
Perhaps the distinction is in my head. Photography encompasses such a wide range of work, and for me the work of these artists is an area I'm less interested in, for me they are creating art and photography is a convenient method for them to present the art that they create.
I think each of these artists are talented and interesting in their own right, but for me someone like Cindy Sherman is more of a conceptual artist than photographer, and it does seem the art market would concur as the big money is in this area rather than a straight forward photographer in the HCB, Robert Frank mould.
What I mean is if you were to describe their work to anyone unacquainted with it, saying they were photographers would not suffice, you would have to explain the prep work that was involved because 98% of the work is the preparation.
Perhaps the distinction is in my head. Photography encompasses such a wide range of work, and for me the work of these artists is an area I'm less interested in, for me they are creating art and photography is a convenient method for them to present the art that they create.
I think each of these artists are talented and interesting in their own right, but for me someone like Cindy Sherman is more of a conceptual artist than photographer, and it does seem the art market would concur as the big money is in this area rather than a straight forward photographer in the HCB, Robert Frank mould.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
The majority of amateurish/trollish "is this art?" threads are, by definition. Even more so when it pretends it doesn't know the answer to the question and proceeds to answer with a dismissive/disparaging assertion.
Charlie Lemay
Well-known
Other than the early work of Cindy Sherman, I don't think much of the photographic art made by the artist mentioned. Tom Wolfe said it best in his book, "The Painted Word," Modern Art exists to illustrate it's theory.
A TA at the Maine Media Workshops once told me that a teacher of his had explained that when art begins with an idea, the idea eventually gets exhausted, but when art begins with a vision, the vision keeps expanding. I thought that was a profound observation and provided a way to look at two extremes in art making approach and to see them, not as exclusive opposites, but as a continuum, a vector upon which most approaches are a combination of both. I made a poster for my students to illustrate this way of looking at art making. You can download a free PDF from the ZoneSimple section of my website if you want to see it.
Robert Graves wrote an essay about art that I read when I was in college. Despite my efforts over the years, I have not been able to find it again and I'd greatly appreciate it if anyone can point me to it. In the essay. he says there are two kinds of art: the art of Venus and the art of Apollo. Not politically correct, I know, but I feel there is something of value in this approach nonetheless. He said that the art of Venus was inspired by the Muse and was intuitive and spoke about man's most fundamental relationship with creation, a visual language that functions like myth in culture. The art of Apollo on the other hand, is the art of experimentation, of man imposing his will on creation. He had a value judgment about it all. He felt that an artist should strive for inspiration and experiment while he waits for the inspiration to come. The art world demands regular production from professional artists, and waiting for inspiration effects the bottom line, so it is little surprise that the conceptual approach to making art holds sway in our time. In my own life experience,
I find I have to agree with Graves. I'm sure others feel differently. I find this a fascinating topic to consider even if it brings out knee jerk reactions from the usual suspects. Trying to figure out what is art and what is not is a little like "Daddy are we there yet." I think in the end, art is what you know it to be for you, not necessarily what gets rewarded or is commercially successful.
A TA at the Maine Media Workshops once told me that a teacher of his had explained that when art begins with an idea, the idea eventually gets exhausted, but when art begins with a vision, the vision keeps expanding. I thought that was a profound observation and provided a way to look at two extremes in art making approach and to see them, not as exclusive opposites, but as a continuum, a vector upon which most approaches are a combination of both. I made a poster for my students to illustrate this way of looking at art making. You can download a free PDF from the ZoneSimple section of my website if you want to see it.
Robert Graves wrote an essay about art that I read when I was in college. Despite my efforts over the years, I have not been able to find it again and I'd greatly appreciate it if anyone can point me to it. In the essay. he says there are two kinds of art: the art of Venus and the art of Apollo. Not politically correct, I know, but I feel there is something of value in this approach nonetheless. He said that the art of Venus was inspired by the Muse and was intuitive and spoke about man's most fundamental relationship with creation, a visual language that functions like myth in culture. The art of Apollo on the other hand, is the art of experimentation, of man imposing his will on creation. He had a value judgment about it all. He felt that an artist should strive for inspiration and experiment while he waits for the inspiration to come. The art world demands regular production from professional artists, and waiting for inspiration effects the bottom line, so it is little surprise that the conceptual approach to making art holds sway in our time. In my own life experience,
I find I have to agree with Graves. I'm sure others feel differently. I find this a fascinating topic to consider even if it brings out knee jerk reactions from the usual suspects. Trying to figure out what is art and what is not is a little like "Daddy are we there yet." I think in the end, art is what you know it to be for you, not necessarily what gets rewarded or is commercially successful.
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
Welcome to the party!