Superblock Response

I really found this work of art very interesting because when I first looked at it I almost completely didn’t notice that anything wasn’t in order. It looked like a normal city street corner but as I actually looked at it I realized it was anything but ordinary. The different images used are put together in relatively normal spots as though to make the overall composition of the image seamless. To me some of the images used architect from different periods of time as they create a different type of imagery to me. What I found most interesting was the ground and how the compositional make up was of all objects and items that are found there but put together in a way that almost seems like graffiti art. The more I looked at the details the more I discovered and found more enticing to understand the aesthetic choices.

            Is there a specific reason to the images chosen to be used in this work or where they just used to make the image flow correctly with the other components of the piece used?

Reading Response #1

             I was most interested when reading this introduction in how it explains the history of photography in technical terms but it also goes a little further and began to express the way in which the art form of photography also changed over time. It was interesting to read how Emerling described the evolution of photography. He did so in such a way that explained the technicalities but also left it up to the reader to interpret why it really evolved and changed over time. It seemed almost impossible for the art world of photography not to expand because as new deviations of art emerged photography had to capture that. It became more of capturing and image to mark a historical note in time and have it to look back at and more of a free way to capture art with less boundaries and more option of the artists manipulation. The more modern the culture of the art world was the more defined photography became an open way to show more than was seen in arts history.

While reading this introduction I was just wondering that when it said the discussion of photography stops after the art historical sense then why did it and how did it develop into the way it did? When did photography become less of a way to primarily learn and more to begin a conversation?

Proposal

As a studio art major and a sexual, women’s and gender studies minor there is a large focus on identity. I am extremely interested in the ways that identity can be explained and can therefore, in many instances define a person. Through the use of tattoos, I want to explore the idea that while tattoos are often times used as a way of self-expression of identity that does not put a strict definition on a person for having them.

Through photographing tattoos up close along with their owner I want to express that they are not one in the same. A person can be someone other than what their bodies show. Having images of tattoos and faces shown together without the knowledge of what tattoo belongs to whom shows that a tattoo, or multiple, are not the only way a person can be seen.