[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Censorship issues
To elaborate on this concept of 'non-intent' or neutrality in work, I do not
mean to say that my work has absolutely no intent. Because even if I made
that statement, that would be my intent, to not have any intent. What I
mean by not having an intent in my work , is that it should not have a clear
cut intent that knocks the viewer over the head and tells him/her what to
think or how to react. It is precisely for this reason that I do not title
my works, because I see the titles as leading the viewer down a certain path
and therefore thinking or reacting a certain way. Now I am not saying that
this is wrong to do, many artists use these types of things in their works
very effectively, but what I am saying is that it is not for me. My work is
very much about the viewer and their own subjective reaction. I do not
profess to tell a viewer what to think or how they should react, rather I
would prefer that my work is a vehicle through which they may better
understand themselves. This is 'challenging' work because it asks the
viewer to actively participate, and things are not laid out so nice and neat
for them. My work is very multi-layered so that various viewers can
interact with it on various levels and have very individual experiences,
even if it is just on the visaul/aesthetic level. I agree with the idea
that the nude figure is never neutral. One of the main reasons that I chose
to do my thesis work on the human figure is because it is already so
pre-loaded. I do not think that people would learn as much about themselves
and their own values if I presented pretty pictures of rocks. Again I am
not saying that there is anything wrong with pretty pictures of rocks, I
like these types of images, but what I am saying is that for my thesis work
I chose to present a more challenging subject for the viewer, and also one
that I could write a thesis about. There as so many tangents and arguments
that stem from the human nude that I could easily spend several lifetimes
exploring this fascinating area. When I say that real art challenges and
engages the viewer I am not discounting more aesthetics photographs, 'pretty
pictures'. Each has its purpose. I think that people may be getting hung
up in the term 'real' and applying their perception that real is somehow
better. Neither is better, just different. There are days that I would
rather look at a bunch of pretty pictures and then days that I want to be
intellectually challenged by works of art. I feel that I have more to
contribute if my fine art photography engages the viewer intellectually as
well as aesthetically. This is a rather new concept for me and I am testing
it out now. I have been to the 'pretty picture' realm, photographed a lot
of landscapes and natural abstracts, color and black and white, so I think
that I am a little bored with it and by it. But I will always have a
fondness for this type of work and the master's in that field. So I have
lots of intents in my work, but I just do not want my intents to alter your
experience. That is really what I mean by this whole non-intent thing. It
is a little bit new.
Gary Miller