"i repurpose the common codes of painting and create a reciprocal self-referentiality in which the reference envelops its referent. the time-based portrait/performance installation is mediated through still photography, providing a record of the performative act in which the codes for representation/painting and indexicality/photography converege."
referentiality? indexicality? WTF? "codes of painting"? what the heck is that supposed to mean? why do artists always feel the need to make such absurdly meaningless statements, using words and concepts that don't even relate to each other, to describe what they do? why can't they just say what they're trying to convey in plain English? is this gal just trying to sound educated? if so, she's failing miserably! she obviously has some talent, and her work is very creative, but this kind of blather is just nonsense!
squirl033 wrote:
referentiality? indexicality? WTF? "codes of painting"? what the heck is that supposed to mean? why do artists always feel the need to make such absurdly meaningless statements, using words and concepts that don't even relate to each other, to describe what they do? why can't they just say what they're trying to convey in plain English? is this gal just trying to sound educated? if so, she's failing miserably! she obviously has some talent, and her work is very creative, but this kind of blather is just nonsense!
Some artists have personalities that are eccentric, odd, brilliant, as well as other related character traits. At least it can seem that way to us mere mortals.
