At my solo show (here), I happened to notice something about the way people react to the baggage that comes with art. I decided that contrary to popular practice, I was going to add a little blurb to each of the 10 paintings displayed at the gallery in addition to details like size, medium and title. The blurb ran from about 50 words for some paintings to about 150 words for some others. In most cases, the blurb tended to explain the social situation that compelled me to attribute that particular face to a particular facet of social reality. Gallery purists might shake and shudder at the fact that I had sunk to lowbrow levels by condescending to add blurbs next to paintings when it was supposed to be the other way; just view the painting and let the opinions garnered by the visual experience play out in the viewers mind rather than distort/subvert the whole process by an artist supplied opinion.
Surprisingly most of the gallery viewers reacted in a very positive way and were very happy to actually note that I had taken the trouble to write the context behind the painting.
As an example, I had the following blurb next to ‘Stomach Clock‘.
It is estimated that 33 million Americans continue to live in households without an adequate supply of food. According to statistics from the Bread for the World Institute, 3.5 percent of U.S. households experience hunger (9.6 million people, including 3 million children.) Children are a disproportionate share of the poor in the U.S. Although they are 26 percent of the total population, they constitute 39 percent of the poor.
My question to you is as follows: When would you consider putting a blurb next to your works? Never, sometimes or all the time. Why?
I find wall text in museums cringe inducing.
In galleries, I prefer an artist’s statement regarding their art at the beginning then I’d rather be left alone to my own thoughts.
Sunil,
I think blurbs are a great idea.
If you think of Christian art of earlier centuries, all the viewers would have the blurbs in their head… this is the annunciation, this is Christ on the cross, etc. Without these mental blurbs, the paintings would be indecipherable.
Nowadays, we are not compelled to hold a single world view. There are many stories and viewpoints. How can we as artists expect everyone to know the background ideas for our paintings?
Would I consider putting a blurb next to my work? Well yes, certainly. The problem is, my paintings are not painted in the context of conscious stories that I can easily blurb-ify. Which is not to say that the blurbs are inappropriate, only that they are difficult for me to produce. In my new painting website, I tried to write text to accompany the paintings, but later put it into a separate “statement” page, along the lines of Tree’s preferences. I am pleased with the result, but I would also be pleased if I could have integrated text and art more closely. I continue to work on the problem.
BTW, Stomach Clock is a fantastic painting, I feel. Would you say the photo is a good representation of it?
Kimberly,
Yes, I understand the feeling – lots of gallery goers feel the same. Not too sure if we are conditioned to think in that sense by the current phase or de-blurbifying any art work and let the ‘I’ take over the experience.
Yes, an artists statement is a great idea, but sometimes conscious intent behind individual paintings seem to get lost in an overarching artists statement. Don’t you think so?
Also an artist’s statement leads you down a narrow path where a work tends to get interpreted in the wake of the statement rather than stand its own ground for the reality it personifies.
Karl,
Looks like you agree. And I am sure I may not find too many agreements as far as this one is concerned – (again for reasons of conditioning that I have mentioned above)…
Good to note that you are continuing to work on the problem. However if you have had a chance to show where you display with blurb and without blurb, I am sure the reactions and the feedback can be eye opening. It was definitely that way for me.
Yes, in this case, the photo seems to have come out ok with respect to showing the painted reality – however the boy’s shirt is a little more ‘gauzy’ and transperent than the photo shows…
Karl,
Can you send us a link to your new painting website (if you think it can be seen by the public)?
I am curious to see it (and the statement accompanying it).
“Yes, an artists statement is a great idea, but sometimes conscious intent behind individual paintings seem to get lost in an overarching artists statement. Don’t you think so?”
Can’t say I’ve noticed that Sunil, will try to keep this in mind the next time I’m at an opening.
I almost forgot. Congratulations on the show!
Thanks, Kimberly.
Sunil, first of all, congratulations on your show!
My feeling is that if you put text (blurbs or otherwise) on the wall next to your paintings, the text becomes part of the work.
Sunil,
Congratulation on your solo show.
David,
Thanks very much.
“if you put text (blurbs or otherwise) on the wall next to your paintings, the text becomes part of the work”
Isn’t that OK?
In a hypothetical situation of my publishing a book about the paintings, I would put the text right next to the work.
Would you feel compelled to add a sentence that lays out what must have motivated you to create a painting? Would that not strike a much needed chord with the viewer facilitating richer dialogue?
Like, what was your motivation for creating your painting ‘Major Motion Picture’? I would have a deeper understanding of your motivations if you told me the intent behind it either in an accompanying piece or on a blog somewhere that explains the same…
Thanks, Birgit.
My feeling is that if you put text (blurbs or otherwise) on the wall next to your paintings, the text becomes part of the work.
David,
You said it perfectly. This was my experience with the website, and why I found it difficult to integrate the text and images. The writing needs to be part of the artwork. That puts a big burden on the text.
It’s the same with titles, of course. You are a master there. Your titles become part of your work, I think to a positive result. One day I would be curious to experience your work in absence of a title.
Sunil,
I want to see more blurbs and paintings!
Sunil: Isn’t that OK?
I’d say it’s neither OK nor “not OK”. It’s just part of the work. I’d have to be there and see it in person to have an opinion about whether it was a plus or a minus.
Like, what was your motivation for creating your painting ‘Major Motion Picture’? I would have a deeper understanding of your motivations if you told me the intent behind it…
For me the title is part of the work, but explanatory text is not (I’m speaking about my own work, not anyone else’s). I use titles to create a context for the viewer to bring another set of possible associations to the visual image. Personally, I’m not that interested in giving viewers a deeper understanding of my motivations. What I want to give them is a set of cues from which to have their own experience. For me that’s where the magic is.
Karl: One day I would be curious to experience your work in absence of a title.
Feel free to download them and view them sans titles. But be aware that you’d be removing part of the work and not getting the full experience :)
Well David,
Just back from your website. So you are a contemporary artist, eh?
Glad to see the American Dreams series is back. I love these paintings. I can’t separate the titles from the work, whether I see the titles or not. LAX, flatlands, forever almost falling. As you said, the title becomes part of the work. These are series titles, I realize, but the point is the same.
“I want to give them is a set of cues from which to have their own experience”
Nicely put, David. Explains the essence of your thinking… Contextual viewing.
So you are a contemporary artist, eh?
My goal is to remain so as long as possible. Thanks for visiting!
These are series titles, I realize, but the point is the same.
Yes, exactly. Like a title for the album, and titles for the songs.
PS – I had temporarily removed the earlier work from my website so as not to confuse gallerists and critics during my last show. But I’m not sure that accomplished anything, since many of them are already confused, and there’s not much I can do about it :)
My goal is to remain [contemporary] as long as possible.
That’s good for you and for us, but from the collector’s point of view, doens’t “post-contemporary” do wonders the value of the work they have purchased?
I was confused about why the earlier work had disappeared, but I am already confused anyway also.
Sunil:
Congratulations on your show. I assume that it has been well received. If possible, do put up some installation shots on your site so we can see how you paintings work together.
That’s good for you and for us, but from the collector’s point of view, doesn’t “post-contemporary” do wonders for the value of the work they have purchased?
I’ve heard it does, but if that’s what they want then I’m afraid they’re going to have to kill me. I don’t intend to help them :)
I always get confused in these discussions of text and art.
I love text, and truth be told, my former life’s artistic ventures were into poetry.
But I don’t much like text used in art unless it’s used very well indeed. Often it’s used because the artist can’t figure out how to make her point otherwise. My daughter refuses to read wall labels, even to the point of ignoring the name of the artist. I always look at dates, but I can find the long text distracting. I will read the telephone book if I can’t find anything else, so I will always read the wall label, regardless of how banal.
Howsomeever and beyond these instant observations, the use of extended text on labels (blurbs), for me, is much like the rest of a gallery/museum ambiance. It is part of the art, just as the desk at the back of the gallery (or the front, or hidden behind doors) and the lighting from windows (gasp!) or not is part of the exhibit. The person in front of me who is searching her pockets for her credit card is a distraction, too, but also part of the experience.
I don’t think of the label blurbs as intrinsic to the art; sometimes the text makes me laugh, sometimes snort, but it is a piece of the whole experience, just as the person in front of me who says “that’s not a quilt!” is part of the experience.
I differentiate between the art and the experience, although that’s a bit like defying Einstein’s relativity concepts –trying to measure without being an influence on the measurement process. One can’t remove the external influences from the art, since we as viewers are external influences.
I saw some Van Gogh drawings and paintings at the Seattle Art Museum two Saturdays in a row. On the first day, it was relatively quiet, not crowded. I saw one set of art works that week; the next week, hung on the exact same spots filled with the same colors and motifs, when the rooms were overcrowded, filled with restless moving bodies, and when I had already spent a lot of time on the whole exhibit, I felt like I was seeing vastly different art — all assembled by the same hand and seemingly the same canvases, but differing because of the crowds/no crowds and my experience/no experience.
So what do I take from that? That you might think you are controlling your audience with the label/no label decisions, but don’t bet on it.
I would have found your label interesting, Sunil. In the case of your art, the text of the label takes on a poetic quality — the facts baldly stated and the poignant visuals sing a duet — a dirge. But most labels don’t sing in that ironic flat voice; they tend to drag. So I would say that blurbs should be used with great care, making sure that the art was enhanced not detracted from with them.
David,
I just revisited your American Dreams series. You are right not to make any text around them. Anything you said would reduce the visuals, not enhance the experience. The titles, as you said, are part of an enlargement of the work; anything more would reduce it.
http://davidpalmerstudio.com/
I see June has preceded me in distinguishing the art from the experience. The labels are certainly part of the experience, and can’t really be separated from the art for that audience, but they can easily be varied to suit different audiences. If Sunil had his work in a hotel lobby where they were holding a human rights conference, the labels might be very helpful in making people feel more connected to the art. Or if it’s a local audience and you’re showing pictures of places they might know and want to know more about. So when deciding how to label, I’d think more about what the audience needs, not what the art needs.
Karl:
I’m wasting a lot of thought here. I’m a poster boy now and must log in before commenting. Just threw away a half hour of comment because I forgot.
That rant aside, let me see if I can remember.
I had something about Japanese anime and the improbably-proportioned female action figures that you find there. Tough grrrls and highly stimulating to a large segment of the population, male and female.
I wanted to know why men should not be seen as exploited in the pages of Playgirl.
Then it was about an erstwhile Broadway show with total nudity and implicit and maybe explicit coupling and the arguments about art vs. sex that raged at that time.
I may have suggested further work in the field of sexual opera where the orgasmic aria is ripe for development.
And finally, just before I began to swear, I brought up the example of Jeff Koons who was able to sell images of himself and his porno wife together and have them exhibited in a number of prestigious venues.
Jay,
In regards to your previous comment, I will be sitting at the gallery tomorrow. I will try to get some pictures then and post on the blog. Thanks for asking.
As regards your second comment, I think you have it misplaced – I am surmising that it belongs to the post by Karl about the pornography as art theme. No harm, I still had a good time reading it and ‘improbably-proportioned female action figures’ are not just limited to Japanese anime – you should go to Khajuraho in Central India.
June,
You do bring up a great point about art and the ambience / experience of encountering the art. Sometimes the company makes all the difference in perceiving art. Like you, I prefer a quiet sojourn with the art that helps me reflect. That said, I have found labels to enhance the experience if the artist has decided to be succinct and no more – but if the labels are too long, I tend to skip the intervening lines. Yes, labels should be edited with care and fervor – so that they complement the art sufficiently and not pose a distraction.
Steve,
You bring up relevancy. Something that I had not thought about till you bought it up here. I never for a moment thought about the audience (my shame), but for some reason I focused on the artwork and the meaning behind it so much that I decided to write/focus about/on the social realities (if I may call it that). That said, I am not too sure if I would change the labels to suit the audience – the art represented a certain facet of reality for me and that was that. Of course, exhibiting the art in a human rights conference, I guess I will think of some kind of a handout or a brochure that would further dwell on the implicit messages generated by the art… I don’t know, I need to think.
Jay,
“Jeff Koons who was able to sell images of himself and his porno wife together”
Guess what, Jerry Saltz (a fairly knowledgeable critic originally with the V.Voice) seems to have anointed Jeff Koons as ‘one of the few artists who still matter’ in yesterday’s release of the New York magazine. I was frankly surprised. Even though I liked a couple of Koons’ older works, I think he is just another hedge fund panderer…
Sunil:
He was born into a family of antique dealers in York, Pa. I hope that explains it.
I don’t know…but I know that I usually get a good case of the jolly gee gollies when I come upon one of his things. Some people have the touch.
Sunil:
But the figures to which you refer were not carved with guns a’blazin and weird Japanese interpretations of Caucasian features. That puts me in mind of early Japanese woodcuts of Dutch and Portuguese traders. I wish that I could have been so devilishly handsome.