Diane Molzan & Alex Olson

| 2 Comments

I hate to give a purely negative review, but quite frequently I find myself disappointed after hearing an artist speak about their work. Very occasionally I find myself inspired and overall pleased from artist talks, but only occasionally. I have found that it can be very unsatisfactory to hear an artist, whose work I admire, talk about their work because they are regularly less enthusiastic or deeply involved with their work, particularly in a conceptual sense. Unfortunately, I was very disappointed by both Diane Molzan's and Alex Olson's talk, particularly miss Olson. I found Olson to be very uninterested in having a conversation about her work. It was hard to tell if her lack of enthusiasm and depth was due to her mood or feeling about the particular talk, or if it was due to an emotional disconnect or lack of interest in her work. Either of these options was an unfortunate vibe to give to her audience. Part of the issue that I had with this talk could be, in part, due to the unpreparedness of the talk as a whole, such as not having images prepared to share with the audience or not having enough questions prepared that the artists actually felt like answering or talking about. I do know that talking about my own work is not nearly as easy as creating it, and for some visual artists it can be very difficult to remove themselves from the studio and observe, critique, and discuss their own artwork. Never the less, I think it is crucial for every visual artist to first consider their artistic practice, why they are making what they make, what their art is about, and if and how their artwork is relevant to anyone else. After a thorough and deep consideration of ones work, artists should practice and hopefully become comfortable talking about their work. Not being able to do this causes the artist to loose credibility for his or her own practice. There is nothing more disappointing in an artist lecture than to hear an artist repeatedly say things like "I don't want to talk about that" or "no my artwork is not about that..." and not giving an alternative answer, simply avoiding all answers about the content in their work.

-Bryn Gleason

2 Comments

I agree that the ladies did not seem interested in talking to the public, and I feel the didn't leave the audience with much enthusiasm about their work. The point of a studio talk, for me, is to connect with the artist and get a deeper understanding of their work. I think they could have left of with us with a bit more information or at least proposed a question to think about while viewing the both their bodies of work. I unfortunately also did not gain anything from this talk.

It’s interesting that more and more artists seem to act in this way. We create this image in our minds on how we expect our role models to act and I know in my case, I start imaging all these different paths or events in an artist’s life that could have led them to create different pieces of work. Like you said here, I usually find talks somewhat unsatisfying in the sense that I’ve hyped this artist up to be something they’re not. One thing that I have notices lately is that I tend to get more enjoyment out of talks from artists that I know little about. I can’t help but think this may be due to the fact that I haven’t yet had the chance to image who these people are or what has motivated them to creating different pieces. But even with this said, I do think that Alex and Diane could have done much more with preparing before speaking to an expecting audience. Their disinterest in both giving the talk and pleasing their audience was really unfortunate and hopefully it’s something that they could work on so that they don’t get so many negative reviews in the future.

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by glea0108 published on April 18, 2013 2:08 PM.

Cristina Schmid was the previous entry in this blog.

Christina Schmid is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.