Comments for Daily Serving

Comment on BRUCENNIAL 2010: Miseducation by moon

moon — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 18:44:06 +0000

was sad to see the Brucennial site bare no listing of the participating artists, nor images…

Comment on VERSUS by Steve P.

Steve P. — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 04:38:17 +0000

I went to see the show last week. Photos are amazing like Ogden, Pillsbury except for the curators’ photos. Horrible quality and muddy for instance the bunny girl. It looks too digital. Ruben should stick to curating.

Comment on National Treasure: Haitian Art History and its Hidden Revolutionary Past by Julie Garner

Julie Garner — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:17:25 +0000

I am so appreciative of this article. It opened my eyes about the importance of looking past instant impressions when following the stories coming out of Haiti (and other places as well). I think the statement that some reporters “didn’t even think to research the religion” is poignant and applies to all of us as well. How often do our assumptions pass as fact without our even noticing? Thanks for the insightful article.

Comment on We Live in Public by Catherine Wagley

Catherine Wagley — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 13:35:55 +0000

Thanks for the tip. Errol Morris is fascinating–I’ve been following him on Twitter.

Comment on We Live in Public by Arden Sherman

Arden Sherman — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 07:05:37 +0000

Dear Catherine,
This is really interesting. I found out about Harris from Errol Morris’ First Person series. If you have not seen it already, I recommend checking it out– its very telling of Harris’ bizarre psyche and his impetus to film himself in such a overwhelming manner (the Internet’s gravitational pull, I guess).

Thanks for the read,
Arden

Comment on We Live in Public by Seth Curcio

Seth Curcio — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 15:55:48 +0000

Wow Catherine, another brilliantly insightful column. Thanks for sharing this with our readers.

Comment on BRUCENNIAL 2010: Miseducation by Catherine Wagley

Catherine Wagley — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 17:59:29 +0000

“Bruce High Quality” is such an unbeatable, amazing name.
This is one of those things I’d rather think about forever than actually see.

Comment on Jill Greenberg by Alix

Alix — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 01:43:45 +0000

Surely anybody who has children would understand the raw emotion shown in this image, and that that is all it is, emotion not exploitation. Or is it that people would prefer their children to grow up under a veil, hidden from the world and unable to express anything that may be considered by others to be contentious? Viewers of work like this are now unable to separate the images from their own social/political agenda and see only two possible relationships between an adult and a child, that of loving parental authority or sexual exploitation. Other photographers such as Bill Henson, Polixeni Papapetrou and Sally Mann have faced the same criticism for their works from a misinformed public who like to have an opinion without necessarily doing their homework on the situation. Yet there is a startling lack of controversy about advertising featuring young girls posed in a sexualised manner in adult styled clothing, or magazines Barbie and Total Girl which regularly feature sexualised content yet are aimed at girls as young as six. Perhaps it is not contemporary artists which needs reporting to the authorities, but instead a re-evaluation of our own social and moral values.

Comment on Foon Sham by Lee Gainer

Lee Gainer — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 15:50:29 +0000

I just wanted to mention that the image of Foon Sham’s installation was taken at the Greater Reston Arts Center (GRACE). The installation was interactive as visitors could add or subtract pieces to the various cones. It was a popular show.

Comment on Jill Greenberg by Lorelei

Lorelei — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:16:58 +0000

This photography promotes child exploitation and must be reported to the authorities. What a shame that kids can be used for such form of abuse. How dare she display these kids in such a horrendous state. If you think this is art, then there is something dangerously and insanely wrong with you.

Comment on Interview with Mario Zoots by Nicholas DiCicco

Nicholas DiCicco — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:48:04 +0000

Mario,
What is it about sports cards, family photos, pornography (fetish images) that needs reevaluating?

Comment on Jonathan Torgovnik and Heather McClintock by Sijal

Sijal — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:09:20 +0000

The alternative is not no pictures at all, but a responsible attitude to the people the pictures are of. If you want to “shoot” people and use them, at the very least try to know their stories and share those as well. This should be a practice of every photographer, whether at the pool party in san diego or a battle among tribes in Papua New Guinea.

Comment on Jonathan Torgovnik and Heather McClintock by Bean

Bean — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:01:53 +0000

Sijal, I think you are right to voice your concerns. The idea of documentary photography is inherently problematic, and to show these “documents” in an art context raises more questions than it answers. But in itself that may be good…whenever I think about the issues you raise I have to ask myself, What is the alternative?—that we don’t see these photos at all? Paying attention to power structures is deeply important, and I think the key is to problematize and explore the issues (although I doubt we can come to a so-called “resolution”). If you haven’t already read it, I highly recommend Martha Rosler’s “In, Around, and Afterthoughts (on documentary photography),” in The Visual Culture Reader (ed. Nicholas Mirzoeff 1998).

Comment on Jonathan Torgovnik and Heather McClintock by Sijal

Sijal — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 12:52:33 +0000

Sorry to corrupt the intrinsic value someone may be enjoying from this, but these are victims of context that any authentic humanitarian should be informed of and approach these photos with the intention to struggle for it, to feel its affects, to recognize their own participation and privilege, and reconsider their decadence, at least in some small way.