anand wrote:
actually, i disagree on this assessment though i can
understand if it is by the particular criteria stated
that it may not be seen in the same way. yet there is
value within a realm of design, landscape, signage,
and as an experiment it is a great idea, in my opinion.
having done landscaping, and even gone at a few shrubs
with sheers in giant bonsai-mode, to me it is opening
up a questioning in a mundane (suburban/corporate/
left over void) landscape which could become some-
thing of value, information, communication, other
than blankness. so to me it is a creative question
and while it may have a semiotic dimension there
are many others by which it may have substantive
value, which is why i like the idea and it makes
me wonder what might be possible. they also seem
to go at various mediums with this idea, which is
interesting if it is considering it all, 'land.'
i mean, the idea of plantings related to the www,
it is funny really. made me smile. and wonder...
this is among my favorite conceptual paintings. it
is curious if maybe we saw the same exhibit, i saw
it in san francisco (sfmoma), a traveling magritte
exhibit. also, empire is at the venice guggenheim.
it sustains a paradox of natural/artifical/virtual
in its light/space and is a wonderful context, or
site plan, for considering architecture. the sun
rises and sets, 'daylight/moonlight' is turned on
and off, controlling by the flip of a switch, etc.
my e-mail address changed and i missed these posts yet
reading from the web archives it made me wonder if
photography has been considered as a type of recording.
a visual recording versus an audio one, as phonographs.
this record, then, has an archaeological aspect with
issues of traces, which maybe film/media archaeology
has already dealt with vis a vis recording, don't know..
thus i wonder: does a recording need to be about anything:
a recording records, records what/why/when/who/where/how?
the record. a record. re-cord... wonder the etymology...
(trivial...) (thought shifters and indexical signs were all exhausted by artists in 1970s)
actually, i disagree on this assessment though i can
understand if it is by the particular criteria stated
that it may not be seen in the same way. yet there is
value within a realm of design, landscape, signage,
and as an experiment it is a great idea, in my opinion.
having done landscaping, and even gone at a few shrubs
with sheers in giant bonsai-mode, to me it is opening
up a questioning in a mundane (suburban/corporate/
left over void) landscape which could become some-
thing of value, information, communication, other
than blankness. so to me it is a creative question
and while it may have a semiotic dimension there
are many others by which it may have substantive
value, which is why i like the idea and it makes
me wonder what might be possible. they also seem
to go at various mediums with this idea, which is
interesting if it is considering it all, 'land.'
i mean, the idea of plantings related to the www,
it is funny really. made me smile. and wonder...
(who went to this Rene Magritte exhibition two weeks ago, and was impressed by this one:
http://www.abcgallery.com/M/magritte/magritte68.html [the empire of lights])
this is among my favorite conceptual paintings. it
is curious if maybe we saw the same exhibit, i saw
it in san francisco (sfmoma), a traveling magritte
exhibit. also, empire is at the venice guggenheim.
it sustains a paradox of natural/artifical/virtual
in its light/space and is a wonderful context, or
site plan, for considering architecture. the sun
rises and sets, 'daylight/moonlight' is turned on
and off, controlling by the flip of a switch, etc.
Anand wrote
<A photograph has to be a photograph of something, or
evidence of the chemical processes of photography itself.>
my e-mail address changed and i missed these posts yet
reading from the web archives it made me wonder if
photography has been considered as a type of recording.
a visual recording versus an audio one, as phonographs.
this record, then, has an archaeological aspect with
issues of traces, which maybe film/media archaeology
has already dealt with vis a vis recording, don't know..
Cheryl McGrath wrote:
To extend further,
Does a painting have to be a painting of "something"?
Does anything have to be about "anything"?
The book mentioned earlier in this list, Vanishing Point
also addresses these issues. As well,
Ad Reinhardt was an artist that delved into "nothing".....
A painter who grappled with these issues earlier than most:
thus i wonder: does a recording need to be about anything:
a recording records, records what/why/when/who/where/how?
the record. a record. re-cord... wonder the etymology...