after a recent portfolio review, where the idea of a series i have been working on did not really come across, i started to question the importance of an idea. i thought the idea that i had presented in my series was effectively communicated and identifiable, and this was based on the responses of critiques i had in school. in these critiques i had presented the concept of my series and everyone seemed to comprehend it, at no point did anyone say that my presented concept wasn't conveyed through my photographs. (the effectiveness of critiques is another thing i'm beginning to question) the fact that i was forced to reveal what my concept was in these critiques may have been the reason that the communication of my concept was never called into question. that is why, when i went to this portfolio review i made sure not to present the central idea behind my series right away, and as i said my concept did not seem to come across.
the concept behind a series or a photograph can change it completely. if a concept is not perceived it can even change the successfulness of a composition. the concept behind my series was animating the inanimate. my goal was to frame these non-living things, with living characteristics, in a certain way so my pictures would appear as freeze frames that would not exist moment after the picture was taken. i wanted to make it look as if they could possibly be living, this was my intention, however the way in which i believe they were perceived was to basically be a documentation of these non-living things. this communication breakdown resulted in my pictures becoming photos that did a poor job of documenting a certain subject. the way in which i placed these non-living things in the composition to create the appearance and possibility of these things being alive became troublesome. this is because they did not really document what was perceived to be the main subject and point of my series.
it was this whole experience which caused me to question the importance of an idea in your work. if everyone involved in my critiques really did fully understand the concept in my series, then hypothetically there is probably a room full of people (including the person who reviewed my portfolio) somewhere who wouldn't understand my concept. so this brings up a couple questions...
is there a really a point in having an idea behind your series? the chances of your idea coming across to everyone is unlikely, due to the fact every person has their own individual experiences they will draw upon when viewing your work. so do you take this into account and accept it? what if there's is only one way you want your work to be perceived and when it is perceived this way it's extremely successful, but when perceived any other way it's unsuccessful? is it still worth doing? what if the only way you can properly convey your important message is through cliche imagery? is this the way to go about it then? i certainly hope not...
the alternative to struggling with all these questions about conveying your idea is simply to create images that look "cool" and/or are exciting. ideally you want your work to look cool, exciting, and have an idea behind it, but depending on your idea, you might not be able to get a really cool stylized image. this is not to say you can end up with an image that is aesthetically pleasing, but aesthetically pleasing image does not necessarily equal a cool image. this is why i am suggesting the possibility that the way to go about photography is to just photograph things that look good and exciting without an idea in your head. this idea brings me to the photographic work of dash snow.
snow's name was recently brought up to me by someone who saw my post about ryan mcginley. this is because snow and mcginley were good friends and mcginley encouraged snow's work. i had run into snow's work a couple years ago and was unable to decide how i exactly felt about it. his work can be funny, strange, exciting, sleazy, dangerous, shocking, and vulgar, which are great qualities to for a body of work to have. (they are also good qualities for a person) the problem i had with snow's photos, was that there were no real ideas or purpose behind them, he was simply just taking pictures of his incredibly exciting, and dangerous life. but maybe this is enough? his pictures look exciting, interesting, and "cool", so who needs an idea, a picture is just a picture, and pictures are just meant to be viewed. so as long it looks good what's the problem? and is it really possible for any photo to not carry an idea? most images will provoke some type of thought when you view them? who cares if its a well thought out intentional idea? so is dash snow's work successful? i have no idea about that or any of the other questions presented above. but i do know that i can appreciate snow's photographs for what they are...photographs.
Yo. It's janssen. I stumbled across your shit cuz i was bored. Honestly dude, I believe that if you truly consider yourself an artist you got to struggle with this...uh…fuck it…we'll call it dichotic turmoil. From what i gathered from your argument, you’re conflicted by the struggle between authenticity and understanding. Basically, how can something be truly…nah fuck that word…we’ll say righteously authentic (you know…real…something that makes your mental dick reverberate) and still successfully convey that idea? After all, if no one can see it (the hidden message or intended point) does it really exist?
ReplyDeleteI wonder this myself. Basically cuz the only fucks reading my work are professors. And they mean well, but they really can’t give as much of a shit as they wish, due to time constraints. And you can’t blame ‘em for being busy, man, they got families and a shit load more work besides mine. Anyway, back to your plight.
The answer is you’re fucked if you do and fucked if don’t. But hey, we all like cummin’.
This the way I look at it: You can’t look at it as a conflict. You gotta see it as parts of a whole. Cuz yeah, if no one sees your point what good is your point. But at the same time, your point doesn’t matter. What makes art, whether good or bad, art is the audience, right? And what’s a good audience without faults. Fuck what’s a good anything without faults?
What I’m saying is:
To you, your art is cool as shit because of the intermittent themes and the actual fuckin’ thought you put into it. What makes it cool to your audience may be either your intended point, something they fuckin’ made up, something they saw, or liked, or whatever. What’s important with any type of art, across any type of medium, is the connection between people. It’s not all about what they get out of it, just that they get into it, even if only for a couple seconds. You know?
All you can hope for is that somewhere you change a perception, or impact a mind, and maybe make some retarded mother fucker turn his brain on. Just stay true to you, man. Don’t dilute your shit just cuz of the short-cummins of your audience, man. Haha, you like how I brought my jizz reference back into play? That’s art, son. Peace and love, mother fucker.
Haha, trust me. You’ll get through to someone. Even if it takes ‘em a while.
Anyway, jus tryin’ to ease ya’ mind.