I became interested in Philip-Lorca diCorcia’s work after coming across a brief description of a couple of his projects while reading for my color photography class at the end of last week. These two projects, Heads and Hollywood, were both made by following conceptual guidelines or patterns. But another one of his projects that functions a little bit differently is A Storybook Life. Though the work was a gallery show, diCorcia originally planned it as a book. The book starts and ends with a photo of his dad, one sleeping in a bed, the other in a coffin (I couldn’t find any high quality images of these examples, but they were included in the pdf interview of diCorcia’s that I read). But the rest of the “70-some” photos between are not just of the same person. There are photos of diCorcia’s other relatives, and also strangers. In this way “the logic of [the other photos’] inclusion is not immediately apparent and the family photos make too little a connection for the story to become a deeply personal one.” I really like the idea of shooting something that starts with personal family photos and leads into a broader spectrum. As each individual person views the images, I feel like they will connect them in their own way (or see how seemingly discordant people/places/situations all relate to one another). The photos of diCorcia’s father were taken a year apart, but the other photos in the book were taken over 20 years. One comment by diCorcia about the project that I liked was that “the sequencing decisions were made to build up tension either by deliberately meeting or denying your expectations.” In this way, the seemingly nonlinear photos become linear in how they are set up to be built off of each other. Reference- Enright, Robert and Meeka Walsh. “Attentive Contradictions: The Photographic World of Philip-Lorca diCorcia.” Border Crossings, No. 108 (November 2008): 1, 28-47.

I became interested in Philip-Lorca diCorcia’s work after coming across a brief description of a couple of his projects while reading for my color photography class at the end of last week. These two projects, Heads and Hollywood, were both made by following conceptual guidelines or patterns.

But another one of his projects that functions a little bit differently is A Storybook Life. Though the work was a gallery show, diCorcia originally planned it as a book. The book starts and ends with a photo of his dad, one sleeping in a bed, the other in a coffin (I couldn’t find any high quality images of these examples, but they were included in the pdf interview of diCorcia’s that I read). But the rest of the “70-some” photos between are not just of the same person. There are photos of diCorcia’s other relatives, and also strangers. In this way “the logic of [the other photos’] inclusion is not immediately apparent and the family photos make too little a connection for the story to become a deeply personal one.”

I really like the idea of shooting something that starts with personal family photos and leads into a broader spectrum. As each individual person views the images, I feel like they will connect them in their own way (or see how seemingly discordant people/places/situations all relate to one another).

The photos of diCorcia’s father were taken a year apart, but the other photos in the book were taken over 20 years. One comment by diCorcia about the project that I liked was that “the sequencing decisions were made to build up tension either by deliberately meeting or denying your expectations.” In this way, the seemingly nonlinear photos become linear in how they are set up to be built off of each other.

Reference-

Enright, Robert and Meeka Walsh. “Attentive Contradictions: The Photographic World of Philip-Lorca diCorcia.” Border Crossings, No. 108 (November 2008): 1, 28-47.

My “favorite” exhibitions from this weekend’s opening receptions are probably very subjective. I could easily talk about any of the other shows I saw and of course, there were so many more galleries that I did not go to on Friday night and I could have enjoyed those even more? (I went to 6-7 in the West Loop.) Basically I would have been pretty unfamiliar with any of the artists’ work and now writing about it I am only a little more informed. I think my overall feeling was that I was wishing for more text accompanying the pieces, talking about concepts, etc. (Especially with Kelly Kaczynski’s work at threewalls; I was pretty interested because of the photo work, but I didn’t feel like I was given enough information. Also the text about the piece was written in a way that assumed the viewer already knew what was going on.) I spent the most time with Angelbert Metoyer’s work at G.R. N’Namdi Gallery, which also seemed a little intimidating but the information in the pieces were complex enough to keep me interested even though I wasn’t always certain what was going on. Also, in terms of personal taste, I love diagrams and text-based work. The text accompanying each piece along with the title(?) was probably not the main focus, but I spent a lot of time with it and wouldn’t have been as engaged with the show without it. It was apparent that the pieces were very layered and complex, both in the paintings/drawings and the ideas behind them. While viewing the pieces I definitely understood the exhibition’s dealing with privileged groups misappropriation of history, but when I got a chance to actually read the flyer for the show it brought up “multi-dimensionality, teleportation and M theory (quantum concepts).” (But if you think about this sentence for a little bit, it becomes a little clearer: “…that present the viewer that time only exists as a personal psychological experience contained by the parameter’s of subjective perception.”) I definitely enjoyed the mix of complex/simple or more difficult/easy to interpret aspects of the show. I also really liked Caleb Weintraub’s pieces at Peter Miller Gallery, mostly because his paintings/sculpture are so intricate. I was really liking his use of patterns, as in, his rendering of textiles in the pieces. The pieces (and even more so from what I can tell of Weintraub’s past work) use a lot of symbolism but are not abstract, the rendering keeps everything feeling semi-real, dream-like or a fantasy movie perhaps. I’m now pretty interested in his project “Whatever Shall We Do With These Piles and Piles of Paint” but I’m pretty sure most of the pieces at the show were not from this series except for one titled “In the thick of it.” As an end note, the painting made me think of this, even though it doesn’t share any emotion qualities…

My “favorite” exhibitions from this weekend’s opening receptions are probably very subjective. I could easily talk about any of the other shows I saw and of course, there were so many more galleries that I did not go to on Friday night and I could have enjoyed those even more? (I went to 6-7 in the West Loop.) Basically I would have been pretty unfamiliar with any of the artists’ work and now writing about it I am only a little more informed. I think my overall feeling was that I was wishing for more text accompanying the pieces, talking about concepts, etc. (Especially with Kelly Kaczynski’s work at threewalls; I was pretty interested because of the photo work, but I didn’t feel like I was given enough information. Also the text about the piece was written in a way that assumed the viewer already knew what was going on.)

I spent the most time with Angelbert Metoyer’s work at G.R. N’Namdi Gallery, which also seemed a little intimidating but the information in the pieces were complex enough to keep me interested even though I wasn’t always certain what was going on. Also, in terms of personal taste, I love diagrams and text-based work. The text accompanying each piece along with the title(?) was probably not the main focus, but I spent a lot of time with it and wouldn’t have been as engaged with the show without it. It was apparent that the pieces were very layered and complex, both in the paintings/drawings and the ideas behind them. While viewing the pieces I definitely understood the exhibition’s dealing with privileged groups misappropriation of history, but when I got a chance to actually read the flyer for the show it brought up “multi-dimensionality, teleportation and M theory (quantum concepts).” (But if you think about this sentence for a little bit, it becomes a little clearer: “…that present the viewer that time only exists as a personal psychological experience contained by the parameter’s of subjective perception.”) I definitely enjoyed the mix of complex/simple or more difficult/easy to interpret aspects of the show.

I also really liked Caleb Weintraub’s pieces at Peter Miller Gallery, mostly because his paintings/sculpture are so intricate. I was really liking his use of patterns, as in, his rendering of textiles in the pieces. The pieces (and even more so from what I can tell of Weintraub’s past work) use a lot of symbolism but are not abstract, the rendering keeps everything feeling semi-real, dream-like or a fantasy movie perhaps. I’m now pretty interested in his project “Whatever Shall We Do With These Piles and Piles of Paint” but I’m pretty sure most of the pieces at the show were not from this series except for one titled “In the thick of it.”

As an end note, the painting made me think of this, even though it doesn’t share any emotion qualities…

hyperallergic:

Ann Hamilton, indigo blue From SF MOMA:
Indigo blue is comprised of some 18,000 pieces of used, blue work clothes that are folded and piled on a steel-and-wood platform. In front of the platform are a wooden table and stool where an attendant sits and erases text from a book titled International Law Situations, published by the Naval War College, exemplifying Hamilton’s incorporation of an active, physical presence within her work. The attendant moistens an eraser with saliva, rubs out lines of text, and allows the eraser filings to accumulate into a pile at the book’s edge. Hamilton has described this activity as a way of “using the body to re-mark history—taking the mechanically reproduced text and replacing it with the mark of the body.” The work also acts as a surrogate voice for the anonymous laborers represented by the mountain of blue uniforms located behind the work table.
THEBESTTHINGEVER