dayoutlast is a record of my direct engagement with mostly contemporary art, mostly Los Angelean.

As this blog has evolved since its 2010 inception, so has my perspective. What I once perceived as central within the investigation was what was central, literally, within the photographic frame that I shared here. While still an important consideration, such thinking has also given way to more peripheral considerations, ones also accompanied occasionally by text (written manifestation of thought) and the oscillations between them. What's missing here are larger unknowns surrounding issues of presentation and representation; the amount of time and space it actually takes to accomplish such first-hand observations; and the quandaries between documentation and interpretation.

Despite my attempt to communicate here with image and text what is essential in some respect about the artwork, neither representation should ever be considered a substitution for the primary viewing experience. Of course, occasionally there are exceptions.

Most of the time, these posts are merely remnants---residual fragments---from my last day out.

Friday, January 23, 2015

Paulo Bruscky "Artist Books and Films, 1970-2013 @ The Mistake Room

What is art? What is it for? When I read these lines on the wall and in the frame of a photograph within the context of this exhibition, it seemed innocent and plain enough, at first.  Then, as I continued to explore the show (hung photographs, covered tables filled with various books and other related ephemera; secured iPads displaying sequences of "book-like" slideshows; and two, seemingly unrelated projections of films albeit ones that seem to explore a probe both individual and collective understanding), I began to answer the question by witnessing Bruscky ask the question within this body of works.  The answer seemed to be about looking, investigating, manipulating, all in time.  So, turning pages, swiping iPads, watching films, and perusing exhibition installations all involve a sequence of events whereby images change and alter the outcome. What I liked was an uneven blend of both abstract and concrete considerations, though arguably there was more of the latter as most of what was seen was instantly recognizable.  The ones that weren't, were a curious counterpoint that kept the show, overall, from being too didactic.

No comments:

Post a Comment