"Ray instinctively knew that the artist's first concern when working in three dimensions is the human body—as reference, implicit subject, or field of experience.Ray made this photograph of himself while in art school. A neat critique of abstraction, it represents an early victory in his campaign to recapture the body for art. The work also confronts the modern tendency to bind and gag our visceral responses. Hovering overhead in disquieting equipoise, Ray suggests both artistic control and personal submission; according to this duality, the picture's formal perfection is in service to a "happening," a gesture of aesthetic activism. The artist's deadpan, mock-aggressive tone is deliriously literal; with an irony worthy of Ray's idol, Buster Keaton, the photograph is a characteristically witty cross between a dangerously close call and a good joke...."
http://www.metmuseum.org/Works_of_Art/viewOne.asp?dep=19&viewMode=0&item=1995%2E474
3 comments:
Nice link!
I can imagine that this image is a lot different to seeing it on this blog then in a gallery.
It becomes a lot more less ambiguous then say the lady with the lonely chair. And there's no gloss to it like Morrisey. It concentrates more on the action. Its much more deliberate in its intent as an image because it has to be so staged or performed. The man in a tree has so many things attached, as knowledge tells us that he has to of been put there and there is a plot or method before the picture. Perhaps there is some uncertainty of the outcome, the tree looks barely (no pun intended)able to hold him.While tied he still looks detached because well, he's really not meant to be there. Why is he there. Why would someone tie themselves or let some other person tie them to a tree - protest - torture. ARt? To be at one with nature? For the thrill.
I agree totally there's that dangerous egde to it - maybe just because of the action. But in contrary to your last post - it is something that is holding him - he is reliant on the tree! His occupancy or hauntage of space is challenged by lack of control. hmm.
name? im not sure, i think just 'tran'. - (tree and man)
Sarah,
your interpretation of 'tran' could change the peception of the cross dressing industry.
Quite right though about the differences between the images, although I wouldnt say it is any less performed than the others its just the effort to take it 'that' far.
I do wonder about the first image (of Francesca Woodman), and these other images I'm adding will hopefully help to explain it, if only to myself.
What you say about the Charles Ray image (being tied to a tree) is similar to Woodmans in that they are both in positions that required another to either assist them in getting their and setting up the image thereafter...
Hi Rie,
I've just been reading this book by Sondheim called 'INDIVIDUAL'. There was quite a funny anecdote about an artist Mike Metz.
''I once helped Metz with one of his pieces. This was a few years ago in Providence, Rhode Island. He was attempting to suspend himself between two ropes, outdoors. The ropes had to be thrown over two trees, about twenty feet apart. The first time we tried this, one of the ropes hit a wasp's nest; Metz was stung about twenty times. We went out again, about an hour later. This time we got the ropes up, but when he tried to suspend himself, one of the trees came down. There was a dazed and solitary digger wasp sitting in the middle of the stump.
Post a Comment