Wow, that's really missing an opportunity, isn't it? Looking at that ad, you wouldn't know they were even photographs -- or even images at all.
I have to say I like his earlier, actual photography a lot better than his overtly political manipulated images he's doing now. The giant sawdust piles and containers were beautiful and real. Photoshopped cigarette butts, not as much.
It would have been cool to get a bunch of billboards and fill each one with one of his images, with no text, or maybe just the website, and let everyone figure out what it is.
That being said, I do think the science center is a good venue for his current work, as opposed to, say, a gallery or museum.
It does sort of encapsulate the problem with talking about art in general, doesn't it? If there was a simple, one-phrase way to sum up what his work was doing, why would the work be necessary in the first place?
I saw the exhibit and loved it.
Posted by
Bill Board on November 30, 2009 at 2:28 PM
@8 your comment about encapsulating art in a statement reminded me of this guy Patrick Mimran who puts up irritating statements on billboards in Chelsea and elsewhere.
His Midway work is so much more thought-provoking than anything I saw at the Science Center exhibit. His manipulated images seemed more like a conceptual school exercise to me than a collection of strong works that merit exhibition as a solo show.
Posted by Manthony on November 30, 2009 at 3:24 PM
Comments (16) RSS