My three year old had me up last night around 1am, so I had a little thinking time. I spent that time thinking about how I might make some Art which is somehow related to my earlier remarks on cultural change and the potential effects on the future economics of photography. I know, I know.
Still, if I am to take the problems discussed by Lewis and Ben seriously, there it is.
The basic unit of the work is a set of four versions of the same picture.
The first is large, maybe a classic Fine Print, maybe a Richard Prince style Instagram appropriation printed big but with all the Instagram crud left surrounding.
The second is small, snapshot sized. It's the same picture, removed a step. A photo of the large print. A photo of a phone with the picture on Instagram, Facebook, whatever.
The third is an illustration, a drawing based on the picture. Something simple. Also quite small.
The last is just a textual description of the picture, and perhaps the smallest of all.
Expand the unit to five pictures (somehow) or contract it to three (somehow). What about framing/presentation? Does the text get the biggest and flashiest frame? And why would it, or would it not?
Make a bunch of these. 3, 4, 50. There's a conceptual exhibition for you!
Hmm, not quite "meta" enough.
ReplyDeleteI think you need to photograph a screen capture of this blog post, then attach it to an email or text which is then sent to yourself. You then photograph yourself reading it inside someone else's exhibition.
The final photograph is then burned, and the ashes used to make a spontaneous drawing on the wall of a cave. I'd suggest the shape of your own hand, but go with your feelings in the moment.
However, all this is meaningless unless you can secure substantial funding to carry out the project. Funding is the true life-blood and measure of the worth of conceptual art.
Talking of conceptual art, btw, I see Yoko Ono's "Grapefruit" is back in print. Worth a look!
Mike