Elad Lassry Presentation

Walead Beshty

In first observing the work by Walead Beshty in this brief video documentary, it appears to be somewhat overwhelming in size, but also monotonous in the sea of blue images that fill the entire studio space. As an artist, but one that has yet to take a photography studio, it was enlightening to listen to Beshty discuss this exhibition and how it came into being as a result of creating other works. To see a body of work presented as a formal artwork, even through it was derived from what he described as waste or byproducts or other projects seemed very poetic. His comment on how this exhibition portrays its own coming into being is quite beautiful and, I believe, a type of photography that is more honest and realistic than anything I have yet seen during this course. I enjoy the dichotomy of seeing the purely representational images of objects, while at the same time, they are not – they are ghosts of a product or image. I have always enjoyed work that has a deeper meaning than what may be seen on the surface of the work, and Beshty’s body of work is no exception. I feel as if I see this type of poetry and concept of work more frequently in media such as drawing or painting, so it was interesting to me to see this represented through a form of photography. As an artist, I am in love with the process of creating work and, therefore, being able to see work where that process is visible. In terms of the size of the exhibition, I believe that it was wise of Beshty to include such a large number of cyanotypes (12,000) as a way to fully express the magnitude of his creative process – a smaller quantity, I believe, would not have been as successful.

RIP: A Remix Manifesto

RIP: A Remix Manifesto was extremely interesting to watch because it tackled a topic in art that is so frequently used by artists all around the world, that being appropriation. While this film addressed the topic through the issue of copyright, I believe the concepts are very similar because they both involve using information previously generated by a different artist and then manipulating said information to make it into something new.

We see this issue constantly where people attempt to protect their ideas and try to make it so that no one else can imitate or reproduce the same or almost identical concept for his or her own. However, much of today’s art, along with the very foundation of art production, is based upon the inspiration that artists find when observing another individual’s work. If we look all the way back to the 1600s and even before, art works that circulated throughout the world were largely reproductions in a sense. Male artists would travel to different areas to recreate as exactly as they could the works they had traveled to see so that way they could bring these recreations back and show them to people that would otherwise never see these stunning pieces of art.

Even in studios today, students are encouraged to dabble in appropriation to create new and intriguing works of their own, myself included. In fact, some of my best works have been created this way. What I find interesting is that the concept of appropriation and copyright seems to change depending on what medium is being used. For example, appropriation through drawing or printmaking appears to be far less contested than in photography. However, even in the case of photography, altering or appropriating an image is still changing the original concept of the work and manipulating it to have a new meaning specific to the appropriating artist, thereby creating a new and original work, no matter how similar to the appropriated work it may be.

Top 3 Choices for Presentation 2

1. Michele Abeles
2. Elad Lassry
3. Richard Galpin

A Response to "What is Conceptual Photography? (Part 3)"

Listening to Adam Broomberg and Oliver Chanarin, along with Lucy Soutter, Sean O'Hagan, Louise Clements, is interesting in the way each artist/photographer views the term “conceptual photography.” Personally, I would have to agree with the mindset that “conceptual” is perhaps an inappropriate way in which to categorize photography, due to the way in which all photography is in some way conceptual. Every artist typically has some sort of concept behind his or her work, including work that is meant to be abstract/not representational. By placing works in to specific categories, like conceptual, this in turn can force an artist to categorize his or her work in a way that they otherwise would not, only doing so so that others may have a better understanding of it. For example, artists like Adam Broomberg and Oliver Chanarin who have used photographic paper to create documentary photography would not consider their work to be conceptual – to them it would be purely representational and more true than taking more standard photographs of an event, such as the kind that are seen in the news. Because I am more privy to abstract or “conceptual” works of art, I also understand that these terms are frequently used by those that may not fully understand an artwork at first glance, especially if they do not see their idea of what is representational or figurative. I think of Pablo Picasso’s Cubism paintings when I contemplate the mislabeling of conceptual art. His work shows what I believe to be the truest forms of representation because of the way he intends a figure to be shown in multiple stages of dimension and movement as a way to counteract the way that most paintings portray a figure in a single moment in time. However, because many people cannot fully comprehend what they are seeing, it is inappropriately labeled abstract or conceptual. Like all artists, each work has some type of concept; therefore, it is redundant and unnecessary to label photography as conceptual.