Nash Gallery Response
Response from early on in class...seem to have not mentioned any specific pieces, apologies.
The current presentation in the Nash Gallery requires a pretty specific audience. To me, I see pieces of random stuff pasted together much like I did in my youth with the remains of my father's latest carpentry project. The presentation of a found object with deeper meanings has always been lost to me. You are taking the work of someone else and gluing it into yours, thus altering the true meaning and story of that piece. I understand that I assimilate what I've seen into my work, wether I am completely aware or not, but somehow their method always comes across as plagiarism. Your piece could not exist without the help of another artist, and whilst you are saying that the piece was found, you again are claiming that YOU found it, it is YOURS to use. Ranting aside, I did not feel as though I could connect with the pieces. The first few photo collages were appealing in a color and composition sense, but the meanings often went right over my head. This is entirely my fault as I do not follow much on the politics of the world, or have much knowledge whatsoever on other countries. The pieces also took on a rather repetitive nature. While it is important for a collection to connect, it is also important to have enough variety that the viewer is interested in which the next piece has to tell, not just "oh, another photo altered piece with floating old people and their history in images." While individuality can also be elaborated on within the added text (little white information sheets to the side), page long elaborations weaken the piece. Visiting the Nash, this time and on other occasions, has merely stressed to me that I have issues situating myself within the "intended audience" category of today's art.