Noriko Furunishi . “…how [the] images end up don’t really exist but, the texture and place exists [in the image]…”
The image of the human being within the landscape is of course important feedback on scale and helps the “viewer / audience” place themselves within the imagined context – a surrogate of sorts I suppose.
Noriko Furunishi Untitled (Rock), 2006
edition of 10
40 x 30 inches (image via: Murry Guy)
Consider how different landscapes appear though with and without human scale – an overt occupation. We (as viewers) project a lot with regard to our own physical understanding and sense of size, scale and measure with the inclusion of the human figure within the image – almost as an aid to imagining ourselves with-in the image – a way into the picture…
What I like about Furunishi’s pictures is that odd sense of vertigo – something about comparing what I expect the landscape to look like – what if feels to be in the landscape – by this I mean feet on the ground -standing and perhaps looking out over the horizon…. and what the landscape scene looks like as imagined by Furunishi.
New work to me… I like how these images defy easy categorization – perhaps it is best to simply say these are very good critical pictures.
My impression is that these works float in almost pure picture form. The picture contains the elements of a photograph, a drawing, a painting – and it is incidental upon what medium the image rests… That is something new and exciting.
What’s so great?
These pictures are modern and potent.
Rather than admiring the laborious recreation of “what has already been”, Bishcof’s pictures (at least those in the “Bricked Castles series” ) move beyond recollection, imitation, or sorry re-creation and reference. Quite unlike for example this work posted on Conscientious by JörgColberg- which rests quite heavily on someone else’s shoulders. In my opinion the referencing sort of approach / process as exampled by Hiroyuki Masuyama recreating Caspar David Friedrich leads only to diluting the potential potency of both…
Bischof‘s Bricked Castles series for me has that potent quality of allowing one to postulate multiple meanings… especially considering the current context of world affairs for example between the “eastern” and the “western” cultural (religion) views of the world…
Combination of cinematography, sculpture and a quite nice example of creating a sense of mood with lighting and motion to reveal the subject. Highly recommend visiting this link to a sample vid for a sense of the work – albeit a “web” experience – which not having seen it in person myself I wonder if it has more presence. Wonderful application of the “inherent” qualities of many computer generated realities – that of being a “bit too clean” and eerily sterile which fits perfectly with the subject matter in my opinion and to great effect.
This is the opposite in a sense of the escapism embodied in many popular animations (thinking of that place called Pandora that has the vital element unobtanium – so needed on this ruined earth) unfortunately this is a reality modeled in a 3-D world we don’t have to go far experience in real life. Yet another example of the artist and the “mental model”…
Bergbauer’s project – Studies after Nature” has been on my mind off and on for quite a while now. In Bergbauer’s work – the “final” images are constructed out of an archive of objects – specifcally found objects (rocks) – from the roadside according to the artist statement. The “studies” of the archive are arranged in various patterns of which I’m unsure of (or if) there may be an underlying organizing structure – outside of an aesthetic judgement and arrangement although the constructions do appear to be bound to a sense of gravity. None the less the resulting constructions are I think quite beautiful – but also quite artificial – and deliberate – full of patterns hinting at structural issues – yet not really resolving them in my opinion. I’m also quite amazed (although admittedly it looks too laborious) at the amount of apparent work done to “catalogue” all of the pieces which are incorporated in to the final studies…
Untitled (basalt – East Central Oregon) 2009 – Matt Niebuhr
On my own road trip this summer, I came across a section of land by the roadside in East Central Oregon, that I have one image thus far that gets me very excited to explore further but with a different approach.
What I’m intrigued by is natural dazzle of that which can be found out in the world (by anyone) as determined by the forces of nature – just by looking carefully or deliberately. This is a theme that I am beginning to be able to discern as a thread in a number of photo studies I’m working. Here, the fractures of basalt arranged according to natural laws – the horizontal fissures describing the shifting forces inside the earth – reminders that the solid ground beneath is not still. I’ve collected a few shards of basalt and the shapes that are revealed in these shards amaze me. I’m looking forward to trying to document these shards in a meaningful way. And then, I’m really looking forward to the next road trip back to eastern Oregon.
“There’s a great quote by Rauschenberg, who said: “If you’re in front of a good work of art, and you don’t change your mind about something, you’re a fool.” And so it’s similar, that if art just underscores that which we already know, then it’s not doing anything for you. It should present something new, some new frontiers for you, or open up some new ideas of thought, even if it’s a dumb reaction and you say, “I could have done that.” Just acknowledging the fact that you didn’t do it shows, at least, that you’re open to that kind of thinking.”
John Baldesari:National City – interview conducted by Hugh Davies and Andra Hales, Nov. 14, 1995 –
I often question if my “art” antennae is tuned in enough to receive a signal. It’s frustrating when I find myself trying to convince myself that “this or that” must be something worth looking at, or alternatively, something worth trying to make – as if there might be a “standard” for appreciation… or the ability to decipher a “communique” in art. This is especially apparent to me when I don’t appreciate a “sanctioned” work – what does that mean – am I really a fool?
The book, John Baldesari:National Cityis a good example – having looked it over, I appreciate the conceptual works – a challenge to conventions – the effort of the artist to convey a kind of information about how one might encounter art, judge it by conventions and “get something” from it. But after that, I’m done with it. National City seems to be too laborious and focused on “getting it” – after which I don’t think it’s something I’d want to or need to come back to. In short, it doesn’t seem to stick with me. So I ask myself what’s missing?
I think I’m realizing this partly in contrast to looking at the recently discovered (for me anyway) work by John Pfahl – specifically in his series of Altered landscapes. I think I appreciate this sort of work by Pfahl more because it evokes a mystery that I can’t quite understand. The best ones embrace an odd characteristic of photographs that transform spatial conditions which look very different “in real life” onto flat planes which is interesting to me – that is part of the mystery for me. This coupled with the obvious added touch onto (or into?) the photograph seems just the right thing to do…
There is a tight consistency and pattern of study or inquiry that appeals to my aesthetic sense and architectural interest which draws me to these wonderfully rich photographic images of Bergbauer’s. The exploration of natural forms and resulting patterns or “structure” resonates for me in the direction of a “quell the clutter” approach… Jurgen Bergbauer is an artist that I am to watch for upcoming work for sure….