Thursday, June 19, 2008

Two Worlds Collide




I think it was the best idea to review the artwork by artists Cottingham and Aziz & Cucher before reading the lecture this week. Because in all truth my interpretation of the images at first without reading the lecture was that the artists were trying to convey the ability to represent the fact that we are all the same regardless of what we believe in the Fictitious Portraits by Cottingham. While also seeing that Aziz & Cucher wanted to represent that we are all different, but those features we seem to use as factors for determination of oneself or of someone else don’t really apply. Then you go to read the lecture, and you realize YES these are digital manipulations, they are not what most would consider a “true photograph”, they do not show us exactly portray the object that the artist is photographing. But does this mean they are less of an artist and less honest in their rendering of the truth? I think NOT. These are images the artist contorted to explain their raw emotion in a blunt and outward manner. I do believe these are actual photographs; the artist had to take a picture of the person and yes in turn rearrange certain aspects. But how is that any different from hitting the “automatic fix button” on Photoshop. That would turn the photograph into another contortion or manipulation, right? Now I must say that FINALLY someone was able to show the true nature of magazines, commercials, and other advertisements that we see every day. I am nowhere near being a perfect 2, yes when I see the images in these publications I would love to be that skinny. But I think we have to take a step back and realize that this is what someone else wants you to see, doesn’t mean you have cohere. Art is a term of your own interpretation, a photograph whether digital or not is septible to that same response toward the subject matter. We need to interpret what we see, not just what the creator wants us to see but what we feel and can visualize. Honestly I thought the woman in the Dove video was beautiful, but I thought “way too skinny”. If other parts of the world can see all the advertisements that we do and also cohere to the same type of image mutilation, but still be okay with overweight women, how are we unable to do the same? That is the question that I think we should think harder about! In America how is it harder to keep that perfect image or ideal of beauty compared to say Italy! They take like 3 hours for lunch and eat and eat and eat and eat, yes causing some to be overweight or “bigger” but that is no different than the 30 pound lighter person behind them! Everything is based upon the context we see individually within the images or art work. Cottingham, Aziz & Cucher I think too a bigger leap in turning away from the average manipulation of images into a different perspective of art, one everyone would benefit from seeing often!

2 comments:

Mike McLaughlin said...

I to had the same thoughts on Cottingham and Aziz and Cucher before i read this weeks lecture. I thought that by taking out the eyes and mouths ala Aziz and Cucher and by taking parts from others pictures and items and making them all look alike ala Cottingham that their intention was to make us feel like we were all the same. After reading the lecture though i realized that my original thoughts were wrong. Oh well. Thats whats cool about art is that you can interpret it anyway you feel.

JB said...

I don't feel Keith Cottingham or Aziz and Cucher's work can be considered "true photography" either. There images are purely artistic.