Exhibition/Ideas

Fajitas!

Have any of you ever gone to an exhibition, and seen some fantastic paintings/sculptures/whatever, but would really like to know where they come from. I think I might be in the minority for this, but I'd love to see the notes and ideas the artist had before making the piece. These could often be ALOT more interesting than the work itself.

Would you like to see the ideas with the work? Or do you think the work should be shown as it is?

snorlax

the ideas are useful but art is a very personal thing for people. for example, two people could look at the same picture and it could mean two very different things for these people, that's part of the quality of art, it's subjective and to a certain degree it should be left open to interpretation by the viewer.

the excepetion is that if it is an informative picture such a painting of a horse race or of a portrait more detail should be given, but only so much as to give the viewer an impression as to where the art is coming from. the rest should be left open to the observer to interpret, eg what kind of brush strokes are being used, what kind of colours/ patterns are oberved and what do they mean to you as a person. also the use of light and shade can shape our interpretation even it is a simple painting of a familiar creature such a cat.

Silent Grape

also you'd run the risk of retaining ownership over the piece after it has been made public, and you'd stop people relating to your piece.

Laplandman

Of course. Art doesn't have to be sacred, to be personal, to be an object merely deposited for the gratification of people who come and go. No, art can be process, material, influence, reference, scheme - abhorring the intimate and militating against the priveleged status of the object - if your into that sort of noise.

artieanna

The artist's statement should address where the artist's concern lies. Some statements are of great assistance in the viewing of an art exhibition, but some are useless full of language you would want a degree in to understand.
although then if we are told too much about the ideas it shapes the viewers perception of the art work. I would love to be able to look at the development of work like i see in college but then it changes the exhibition setting totally. Its a difficult one!
artieanna

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Absoluely!!

Saw a fantastic piece in Sweden once that took up a whole room. Seven or eight scooldesks, easch one vandalised or destroyed in some way. One wsa open and had fake knioves in it one had a whole bloown in the lid another had perspex lid with porographic magazines inside.

In the middle of it all, was a mannekin of a small innocent nude boy wearing nothing but a schoolbag. It was the only figure in the room. There were some fascinating sketches, complete with notes... written in Swedish !!!

Would love to have been able to understand them....

Ip.

petek

Ikky Poo2 wrote:

Absoluely!!

Saw a fantastic piece in Sweden once that took up a whole room. Seven or eight scooldesks, easch one vandalised or destroyed in some way. One wsa open and had fake knioves in it one had a whole bloown in the lid another had perspex lid with porographic magazines inside.

In the middle of it all, was a mannekin of a small innocent nude boy wearing nothing but a schoolbag. It was the only figure in the room. There were some fascinating sketches, complete with notes... written in Swedish !!!

Would love to have been able to understand them....

Ip.

eh, i wouldn't say a piece like that needs much explaination, i know what its about without even seeing it..

i think if u need a piece to be explained to u at the exhibition, then its not a good piece of art. i really hate artists statements. there should be more reviews/articles written about artists instead.

although, having said that, i do enjoy artists lectures sometimes. but i suppose if the art is boring then the artist is boring then the statements will be boring too.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Not talking about explanaiton. There's more to a lot of art than just what it means. The journey is as important as the destination.

Silent Grape

'i think if u need a piece to be explained to u at the exhibition, then its not a good piece of art.'

ARRGH! right, so the blatantly obvious pieces of art, that give u know no choice but to agree with what the artist wants you to think, is 'good' art.

right.


once the art is made, whatever you think of it is what it means. what the artists intentions are, once it's made, completely void. everybody has different angles and they are all equally valid. if someone doesn't 'get it' in thier own way, thats okay too. it doesnt make it a 'bad' piece of art.

urgh.

petek

so yeah, i agree.

discussions about work are great. but statements are not.

i'm not saying art should be really simple, in fact i prefer the complete opposite. but i never feel like i want to read anything about good art, i just want to see it/experience it. and if i do read something about it, it usually makes me like it less.

its like if u made a cool piece of art, and its good and everything, people like it and all, and then yr mum or dad try to describe it to yr uncle or something, it makes u cringe. or at least it makes me cringe..

i suppose its because i like art that can't really be explained or described, thats got too many levels to be simplified into a statement or short description.

Silent Grape wrote:

'i think if u need a piece to be explained to u at the exhibition, then its not a good piece of art.'

ARRGH! right, so the blatantly obvious pieces of art, that give u know no choice but to agree with what the artist wants you to think, is 'good' art.

right.


once the art is made, whatever you think of it is what it means. what the artists intentions are, once it's made, completely void. everybody has different angles and they are all equally valid. if someone doesn't 'get it' in thier own way, thats okay too. it doesnt make it a 'bad' piece of art.

urgh.