also thanks to Beryl for the invitation to respond to this month's
theme from me. I thought I'd share some of my writer's experiences
I like writing. I go see an exhibition, suggest a review, editor
likes it, it gets published, I get a small fee.
The press release is helpful for supplying information about aspects
of the work on show that are invisible. This is true for every work
and is not pertinent to the 'ephemeral' only: any idiosyncracy, say a
personal iconography, in a work of art requires explanation. If the
works come from a different cultural background or age, a press
release should help to understand what is going on. If the press
release doesn't do this job, I talk to the curator, press person,
gallery or museum director.
When writing, the description of the 'ephemeral' in the writing about
a work of art may require special attention, as there may not be a
photographic record. For me, descriptions are important as any
further arguments for a work of art derive from the appearance of
the work itself. The description of a monochrome painting may take
up less space than a time-based work or a socially interactive one -
hence a text on a socially interactive work is more interesting to
read and to write, as a number of processes need to be described and
analyzed. Descriptive texts are often frowned upon: not by me. I find
that texts without descriptive elements to support an argument are
opinionated twaddle. The description leave room to form my own
opinion. The role of writing about art, for me, is, roughly, to
present to readers the form of visual thinking and to try explain how
intention, manifestation and cultural political whatever context hang
together, or not. I am not a critic - if I am not interested in a
work or even dislike it, I wouldn't waste time on it. For me it is a
matter of disseminating knowledge not judgement.
On the other side, as an artist to write about one's project, it is
to find a balance of getting an editor interested to either send
someone, or to make the writer interested to suggest my works /
projects to the editor. Some people frown upon the self-publicist.
Within the New Media, Web etc environments some of the dependencies
from editors can disappear. I can publish, but I won't get a fee.
Here, writing itself - which is somewhat ephemeral to begin with -
ephemeralizes itself and may become part of a discourse about the
ephemeral. This is the writing about writing territory, I presume.
I don't think (New) Media works are really ephemeral. They may have
an unpredictable life span and they may require equipment not
available to everyone but usually there is a manifestation of some
kind that lasts for some time. But the political, social etc contexts
are ephemeral, the experiences, the memories are ephemeral. Because
of its nature of newness, of maybe because of not connecting to works
of art previously known, because of maybe not participating in
fashionable discourses, a work of art may have more difficulty
penetrating the circuit of public attention. It therefore requires
more writing, more visibility, more support, which is also why it
appears to be more ephemeral.
best
Jorn Ebner
************
http://www.jornebner.info
|