HOME | DD
revolution-is-sexy β I keep everything in here.
Published: 2007-04-11 01:07:01 +0000 UTC; Views: 1293; Favourites: 13; Downloads: 7
Redirect to original
Description
This reminds me of Eleanor Rigby, who kept her face in a jar by the door. Who was it for?All the lonely people, have ugly orange handbags.
I am my own model and photographer, and I am my own RenΓ© Magritte.
Related content
Comments: 21
Mine too, I'm glad you think so. At first I thought everyone was leaning toward the traffic cone one, but I'm used to people disagreeing with me about what my best art is. 
π: 0 β©: 1
I know that feeling all too well. The pieces I think least of from my gallery always get the most attention...
π: 0 β©: 0
Hawt. No, only joking. Not that you're not. I was singing "Happiness is a warm gun" in the shower today. I love that song. Not so much Eleanor Rigby.
Onto the art criticism: firstly, I'm impressed by the technical aspects - it must have taken some time to get the pose/angle/positioning of object right. Secondly, I am a bit put off by the surroundings - I'd like to focus more on the image - I mean the bits on the floor, the saggy curtain. Perhaps this is part of the intention of the work? Thirdly, I like the idea of the hidden face - a very Surrealist conceit. Finally, I enjoy the tension your works create: between what is obviously a beautiful face, but obscured and defaced by objects/paint. A simultaneous desire to be seen, but also to be regarded as an artist, not just a "model" (as you mention in your latest journal entry; and as your previous prose piece riffs around). By putting these two elements (model vs. artist) so directly in opposition/juxtaposition, you force the conflict into the foreground of the art work. This work continues in that vein, but unlike your previous pieces, is more stark, in that the face is completely hidden and not just "defaced" (in the traditional sense of the word). Defacement here becomes literal.
I guess you can read too much into things, can't you? Maybe I've gone too far. But these are the things I consider when I look at this: How important is the artist in the context of their work? How much is art about caressing one's own ego? Is The Author really dead? etc. etc.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ooh, that has got to be the best in depth analysis of my artwork that I have ever gotten. You obviously touched on a lot of important themes. I don't think you read too far into it. I think you could go farther. I mean, it's impossible not to display oneself without objectifying oneself. Can I embrace my objectified body as an aesthetically beautiful thing, while simulataneously being able to distance myself from my art, so I can critique and improve it?
I also agree about the background, I did compose it with some intention, but I feel it usually detracts from the piece. I also feel unsure on whether to crop the floor. I think it sorts of adds a distance between the viewer and the object/model, which is the distance of the camera and the model, which in a way, is the distance of the artist from her model self.
Now maybe I'm reading too far into my own art.
π: 0 β©: 1
Well, I'm glad you found it interesting. One interesting point you raised: the need to be distanced from your art to be able to appraise and improve it. Distance in time adds perspective for me. But at the same time, I rarely find it beneficial to revisit work (though I did attempt this a bit earlier this year, and rewrote some poems); rather, the distance enables me to recognise worth and approaches which can be applied in future works. Do you think you are making yourself more/less attractive by obscuring your face? Does mystery add to attractiveness? Can we ever love the things we know fully, that have lost their mystery? It's a paradox, I suppose.
I wouldn't crop the floor. I nearly mentioned it in my critique, as I did notice there's a lot of it. That's good. Like you say, distance between the viewer and the object = removal of intimacy? I think it could be effective to exaggerate this, maybe get the camera nearer the floor and looking up. Turn yourself into a god. My comments about the background were more to do with the couple of bits of lint or balled paper against the skirting board: I'd either have more of this or none.
Let's read even further into it! Huzzah!
π: 0 β©: 1
(1) I rarely revisit work. Art is a practiced skill. Entering an intuitive and creative state and spontaneously writing/photographing/painting allows us to access our other intelligences, like muscle memory and unconscious memory. Making art and engaging with it, as well as engaging others with it, just naturally improves ability over time.
(2) Beauty is a subjective experience. Whether or not obscuring my face makes me more beautiful is dependent on the viewer and their values. Different photographs with different types/levels of obscurity generate different reactions and attract different types of users. As far as my subjective experience of my own beauty, I do believe that I am more attracted to my inner self by exposing it in lively and unusual ways. I am expressing my surrealist self, and that is very satisfying to me, so I experience beauty in the process as well as the product.
(3) I experimented with the amount of floor/background as well as height of camera relative to object/model. As far as the unclean floor goes: I feel if it were too clean that would be too artificial. Moving all the furniture and books to create the empty space is fake enough. A little texture never hurt anybody.
π: 0 β©: 1
I agree - art is like a learned muscle response, maybe like a tennis player reacting to an approaching ball. You learn a way of reacting to the world without thinking. I got into the right state for this a couple of years back, but recently I've found myself having to relearn. It's not like riding a bike.
Maybe I need to do more art about my physical self. I actually rarely look in a mirror. I find it too unnerving, like I'm looking at someone else. It doesn't feel like me mostly. Perhaps I need to spend some time acclimatising to my own skin.
It wasn't so much the floor being unclean, it's just a couple of tiny bits of paper or something. I think maybe it's my eyes: I tend to spot detail and can't look away from it. I can't sit in an untidy room. It can be covered in dust and cobwebs, so long as the books all line up and there are no chunks of food under the table.
π: 0 β©: 1
Are you a little OCD?
π: 0 β©: 1
I think maybe a little. But I hesitate to use the term because it denotes mental instability. I'd probably characterise it as "pickiness". Not a good character trait, but I can't help myself.
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm a fan of a little mental instability. Not in the cheap tawdry sense, but in the layer and nuance sense. I'm a little ocd in particular ways, but overall, I'm pretty laid back.
π: 0 β©: 1
I think I'm pretty laid back but a bit pernickety about tidiness. I also get overwhelmed when a room has too many people in it all talking at once. I have hermit tendencies. I am also a fan of a little mental instability. I say that now, but later I will be lying in bed with my brain in turmoil, no doubt.
π: 0 β©: 1
I have a combination of hermetic, introverted tendencies and fun-loving extroverted tendencies. I believe the word for that is bi-polar, also known as manic depression. Hey, what can I say, I am also a fan of a little mental instability. And just to make my point, a series of emoticons: 
π: 0 β©: 1
I sometimes wonder if I have a touch of the manic depressives at times: I can definitely hit massive slumps. A few weeks ago I was going to bed at around 6.15 pm as I didn't have the energy or urge to do anything. Maybe everybody is like this but only recently we've developed a vocabulary to describe it?
I thought you might like this emoticon:
Athough the finish is slightly amateurish. What is it about them that makes me seek them out? Evil temptresses.
π: 0 β©: 1
I don't know. There's the blues and then there's serious f*cking depression. Sometimes people I know will be like, "aw, I'm depressed" and I want to swear at them and tell them that they are way happier than they think, because serious depression is an inability to function. But then I choose politeness over honesty and quietly go on my way.
So, I think the psychological vocabulary is recent, but I don't think everybody is manic depressive.
π: 0 β©: 1
I never say "I'm depressed". I'd probably just say "tired" or "fed up". I never get so blue I can't function, just enough to make me not want to function. True, not everyone is manic depressive, and I am trampling all over the psychological term.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, that's fine. Psychology is a pseudo science philosophy, so the terms are really arbitrary anyway.
π: 0 β©: 0
I'm reminded of Ruby Tuesday... 
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you. I like my ideas too.
π: 0 β©: 0
Beatles.
I was listening to that song today.
I really enjoy this.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you. I love that song. Sad beautiful doesn't get much better than that. And I realized the lyric reminded me of this, since it's popular to include lyrics with artist statements on here, I thought I'd give a shout out to one of the best bands ever.
π: 0 β©: 0