• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Mergulho Do Corpo (Diving Body)

Cem_Usakligil

Well-known member
Hi All,

Here is a recent image I am quite satisfied with. It expresses my vision and intent rather well and does that so at various levels. Having said that, it is somewhat obscure and I'm very curious whether it will connect with the lookers without any explanation and if so, how and why? Any feedback and/or C&C from you will be very welcome.

mbvb1.jpg



Cheers,
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Cem,

This is a big surprise in boldness and simplicity. I have comments that I'm going to hold off just a wee bit to get other to contribute first.

Asher
 

Ken Tanaka

pro member
Cem;
I'm guessing that this is an art object on display in a museum? And those are your legs and feet?

Could you disclose a bit of your "vision and intent" for this image?
 

Cem_Usakligil

Well-known member
Could we have the name of the artist who made the stone basin and text?
The artist who created this concrete basin is Hélio Oiticica (July 26, 1937 – March 22, 1980) who was a Brazilian painter, sculptor and performance artist. Here is an interesting link to his work and another one from Tate Modern.

I have seen his work at Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen in Rotterdam, where there is a Brazil Contemporary exhibition in display.

This particular piece is called Box Bolide 22 Mergulho Do Corpo (from 1966 - 1967). It is a concrete water basin with an inscription in black rubber letters at the bottom.

Cheers,
 

Cem_Usakligil

Well-known member
Cem;
I'm guessing that this is an art object on display in a museum? And those are your legs and feet?

Could you disclose a bit of your "vision and intent" for this image?
Hi Ken,

See my answer to Asher about the object itself. Re. my intent, it is about a few things. Among others; continuity in a real and imaginary loop and freezing the moment of a split second in time and space. But it is also about escaping this dimension into another one. I wanted to create a powerful image which would cover multiple aspects in various layers and yet be simple enough. This is as good as I can make it :).

Cheers,
 

Ken Tanaka

pro member
Here's something for you to consider, Cem; who's using whose work here?

From your perspective you're using Hélio Oiticica's sculpture to facilitate your imagery vision. But I can't escape the notion that, in doing so, you're actually facilitating Oiticica's vision for this work. Clearly he envisioned people walking up to this thing and looking down. Click! In your "fraction of a second" your toes have completed his work!

This is by no means a criticism of your image. Hey, I spend a fair amount time with art. Talking with modern artists of this genre you quickly realize that (a) their "visions" are often somewhat fluidly synthetic and, (b) the viewer is often part of their inside joke. So all the better if you can establish a symbiotic, or at least a passively cooperative, relationship with such works.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Here's something for you to consider, Cem; who's using whose work here?

From your perspective you're using Hélio Oiticica's sculpture to facilitate your imagery vision. But I can't escape the notion that, in doing so, you're actually facilitating Oiticica's vision for this work. Clearly he envisioned people walking up to this thing and looking down. Click! In your "fraction of a second" your toes have completed his work!

Ken,

Certainly with his capes, some works were meant to be occupied or inhabited by people and so complete some extra dimensions of experience.

So all the better if you can establish a symbiotic, or at least a passively cooperative, relationship with such works.

So yes, Cem has made material his involvement with the original work. Of course the artist knew observers would lean over and be reflected. However, Cem went one step further, he included the base and the floor and them cut them off in an unalterable manner. This defines would might be etherial into a new form that expresses just one transient possibility and this is set forever!
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi All,

Here is a recent image I am quite satisfied with. It expresses my vision and intent rather well and does that so at various levels. Having said that, it is somewhat obscure and I'm very curious whether it will connect with the lookers without any explanation and if so, how and why? Any feedback and/or C&C from you will be very welcome.


mbvb1.jpg




Hi Cem,


You have followed in the steps of Alfred Stieglitz who photographed Edward Ducamp's "Fountain" and so made himself part of the story of the original work.

blindman_no.2_04.jpg


Edwards Stieglitz The Exhibit Refused By The Independants Source

However, this was not my first thought. Let me rewind my impressions and share with you my reactions and thoughts.

I said "This", (the photographed installation), "is a big surprise in boldness and simplicity", but it's roots are spread amongst the ranks of important artists in Europe and Brazil. I wrote down my immediate thoughts without any edits to see if I could be honest in what I thought without reference to any resource other than my own impressions, rationale and memory and predjudices. I then sent this to Nicolas Claris so I wouldn't be able to cheat. I wanted to restrain my own taking advantage of learning more of the original work or the ideas of anyone else. Before I looked anything up, I thought of one more idea, #3a, a reference to Duchamp, that came to me immediately I'd sent my copy off to Nicolas!

1. It has the features of some heraldic flag, the way he's included the art object dispayed together with the white of the display base and the grey of the floor.

2. The art is a representation of an opened clam or mussel, (moule). These are "diving creatures. So it's a play on the shape.

3. The text, implying that "(This is a) Diving Body", a creature with behavior, is a play on the Magritte series of a pipe, Ce n'est pa une pipe"*. That was an existentialist argument with himself on what a painting was. It is after all, just a layer of ground up wood/ cotton with glue, (ie paper) and successive layers of pigment/dyes in the picture representing the pipe. It is, of course not actually a pipe.

3.a The use of a manufactured concrete basin, if that's what it truly is, would be referring to the Dadaist Duchamp throwing into the world of art a Urinal as a fountain, being scorned and then being accepted! So this work is in that spirit, defiant.

4. It inserts Cem's presence into the 3D space of the picture. we go from his feet on the ground to the reflection of his hands with the camera in the water of the basin. In his new version of the art work he has deconstructed the meaning of the work and it is no longer a diving body but one entangled with his presence and the floor.

5. Having taken over the "diving Body" as a prize, loot or booty, he has embedded it in a flag or banner for all to see. This is what knights do when they go on a mission and win a battle, joining themselves to history. They earn the right to celebrate their mastery by including that on their personal coat of arms.

I hope this unedited, uncorrected cascade of thoughts, (even for respect to syntax, except for insertion of 3a), is helpful. At least it's an honest representation of my gestalt interfacing with your work product and the contained original. Thanks for sharing and stimulating my brain. I have learned a little more today :)

Asher

*We discussed Magritte's challenges to representational art here.
 

Cem_Usakligil

Well-known member
Here's something for you to consider, Cem; who's using whose work here?

From your perspective you're using Hélio Oiticica's sculpture to facilitate your imagery vision. But I can't escape the notion that, in doing so, you're actually facilitating Oiticica's vision for this work. Clearly he envisioned people walking up to this thing and looking down. Click! In your "fraction of a second" your toes have completed his work!

This is by no means a criticism of your image. Hey, I spend a fair amount time with art. Talking with modern artists of this genre you quickly realize that (a) their "visions" are often somewhat fluidly synthetic and, (b) the viewer is often part of their inside joke. So all the better if you can establish a symbiotic, or at least a passively cooperative, relationship with such works.
Hi Ken,

Thanks for your thoughts, I did not take it as a criticism don't worry. I think that you're probably right. But I am quite happy to be a symbiotic part of enhancing Oiticica's art/vision whilst creating and ensuing mine. Just for clarity's sake, there is no doubt in my mind as to the fact that this picture of mine is an individual piece of art regardless of the fact that it builds upon somebody else's. But I know you well enough to realize that this wasn't the point you were trying to make anyway, right?
 

Cem_Usakligil

Well-known member
.....So yes, Cem has made material his involvement with the original work. Of course the artist knew observers would lean over and be reflected. However, Cem went one step further, he included the base and the floor and them cut them off in an unalterable manner. This defines would might be etherial into a new form that expresses just one transient possibility and this is set forever!
Hi Asher,

Thank you for your statement above, I agree fully.

Cheers,
 

Cem_Usakligil

Well-known member
......
However, this was not my first thought. Let me rewind my impressions and share with you my reactions and thoughts.

I said "This", (the photographed installation), "is a big surprise in boldness and simplicity", but it's roots are spread amongst the ranks of important artists in Europe and Brazil. I wrote down my immediate thoughts without any edits to see if I could be honest in what I thought without reference to any resource other than my own impressions, rationale and memory and predjudices. I then sent this to Nicolas Claris so I wouldn't be able to cheat. I wanted to restrain my own taking advantage of learning more of the original work or the ideas of anyone else. Before I looked anything up, I thought of one more idea, #3a, a reference to Duchamp, that came to me immediately I'd sent my copy off to Nicolas!

1. It has the features of some heraldic flag, the way he's included the art object dispayed together with the white of the display base and the grey of the floor.

2. The art is a representation of an opened clam or mussel, (moule). These are "diving creatures. So it's a play on the shape.

3. The text, implying that "(This is a) Diving Body", a creature with behavior, is a play on the Magritte series of a pipe, Ce n'est pa une pipe"*. That was an existentialist argument with himself on what a painting was. It is after all, just a layer of ground up wood/ cotton with glue, (ie paper) and successive layers of pigment/dyes in the picture representing the pipe. It is, of course not actually a pipe.

3.a The use of a manufactured concrete basin, if that's what it truly is, would be referring to the Dadaist Duchamp throwing into the world of art a Urinal as a fountain, being scorned and then being accepted! So this work is in that spirit, defiant.

4. It inserts Cem's presence into the 3D space of the picture. we go from his feet on the ground to the reflection of his hands with the camera in the water of the basin. In his new version of the art work he has deconstructed the meaning of the work and it is no longer a diving body but one entangled with his presence and the floor.

5. Having taken over the "diving Body" as a prize, loot or booty, he has embedded it in a flag or banner for all to see. This is what knights do when they go on a mission and win a battle, joining themselves to history. They earn the right to celebrate their mastery by including that on their personal coat of arms.

I hope this unedited, uncorrected cascade of thoughts, (even for respect to syntax, except for insertion of 3a), is helpful. At least it's an honest representation of my gestalt interfacing with your work product and the contained original. Thanks for sharing and stimulating my brain. I have learned a little more today :)

Asher

*We discussed Magritte's challenges to representational art here.
Hi Asher,

Rest assured, you are not the only one who has learned something today, so did I thanks to your extensive analysis and comments. I am still in the process of "grokking" all the wisdom kindly offered by Ken and yourself. Coincidentally, I did something involving Magritte along the same arc of intent too. But it is by far not as successful to share it here.

Cheers,
 

Ken Tanaka

pro member
... But I know you well enough to realize that this wasn't the point you were trying to make anyway, right?

Right.

There have been, and still are, quite a few contemporary artists who employ the concept of incorporating viewers and surrounding environment into their works. Jeff Koons' gigantic metallic gewgaws come immediately to mind. Closer to (my) home Jaume Plensa's Crown Fountain (recently featured in this thread) is another work that's dependent on visitors for its completion.

But my personal favorite, and on also in Chicago's Millennium Park, is Anish Kapoor's Cloud Gate (a.k.a. "The Bean"). Not only does Kapoor incorporate viewers but he distorts their sense of spacial relationships. You really have to see it to get the full effect.

In this context Oiticica's work here is actually somewhat incidental in incorporating the viewer. THe gesture of hovering over the piece and looking down into it is all that Oiticica probably wanted. Taking a photo of yourself doing to... well that's now your little piece of art, eh!
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Is this really self-portrait and why we make art of art? Some thoughts.

Cem,

I like that you used this piece of art to reflect your self portrait. No heavy analysis.

Beautiful!
Hi Kathy,

I want to take you on a different path. However, it's not heavy load of thinking here. What follows is a look at this activity of "Incorporating one's own presence into great works of art". What might it be about? Allow me to lead you, albeit with my own uncertainty.

I don't think Cem used the work to reflect his image and so make a self portrait. Rather he dealt with the installation as a predator would deal with his prey. He used it as part of his meal and entertainment. The artist meant Cem to bend over and see his reflection. Cem wasn't satisfied with that alone!


mbvb1.jpg



Cem Usakligil "Booty" (see his boots)


So here's what he did. He looked at the flloor and the white base and arranged the art as if it were booty on his flag. This concept comes from the built in behavior of our cultures. Heads on spikes, Captured castles on heraldic banners.

39968517.JPG


Gil Garcetti Iron I admit I like the design and I bought the book!

When Stieglitiz photographed Duchamp's work, (post # 9 in this thread, above), ex-prosecuter (of O.J. Simpson fame), photographed the Disney Hall Construction against the Iron will of the builders and people paying for it and Ken beautifully photographed the famous Chicago fountain, (by invitation), all were taking part in the celebration and capture of great works.

ArchOfTitus.jpg


Arch of Titus Source

Titus had the art plundered from Jerusalem carved into his victory Arch.

Being attached to a great prize is a normal human endeavor that can give us rank and fame. Cem has done the same, a small step, in a big way. That's what this is about! He carved out the floor and base to make the booty his own. That's what a warrior does.

If Cem was already a known villain or disgraced/popular politician, actor or such, then this work could likely have immediate attention. I think he has to rob a bank or something like that to get the extra attention for this to make him famous. The picture, itself, is worthy of our interest and is well executed.

So it's not intended as or indeed is a "self-portrait". Still that would be a great idea. Now is it really beautiful? For me it's impressive and that's enough!

Asher
 

Ken Tanaka

pro member
Hey, I have Gil Garcetti's "Disney Concert Hall" book, too! It's a terrific chronicle of the project. Who knew that the former (in) famed LA district attorney was such a good photographer?! I'm jealous of the access to the project he was given...although I'm not at all sure I would have swung from safety lines to shoot the Pritzker Pavilion's construction!
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hey, I have Gil Garcetti's "Disney Concert Hall" book, too! It's a terrific chronicle of the project. Who knew that the former (in) famed LA district attorney was such a good photographer?! I'm jealous of the access to the project her was given...although I'm not at all sure I would have swung from safety lines to shoot the Pritzker Pavilion's construction!
Ken,

He wasn't given access! Not at all! He used his political contacts well. He made a deal with the Iron worker's Union to highlight them and was given a hard hat and harness against the wishes of management! He used his Leica camera and a great technique he developed for enlarging the film. He made 8x10 prints and then photographed them to get a a larger negative! Amazing what one can do without photoshop. This work transformed Gil and he went on to travel to Africa and cuba and has followed up with some fine work. The magic was first being attached to the O.J. Simpson saga and the result and second being attached to Frank Gehry's work. In the final book, Gehry even provides an introduction.

If Gil didn't have talent he couldn't have done this transformation from a District Attorney to a "fab" photographer. Kudos to you Gil!

Asher
 

Kathy Rappaport

pro member
Gil and Cem

I took a lighting class with Gil last year. He used a Canon for the class. Yes, he is talented and has quite an eye. I think that his life work of being promenent in Los Angeles has definitely opened doors for him as a photographer. I think you need contacts and more to rise above here - we have thousands and thousands of very talented photographers in LA.

That said - and I am not an art student/historian by any mean - whether or not accidental, there is a self portrait element to this. My own path of photography is down that of the portrait world and so for me, this is the wonderful part of the image. This is why I stated without analysis in my original post.
 
Top