Data Mine: Danger, Loose Debris (artist's book)

[WA Rodgers]

This is from the Options 2013 show, curated by Gerald Ross, MICA, via the Washington Project for the Arts.The show was from April 11 - June 9, 2013.  The following images are the front cover and a few interior pages.

[DKeys]

feast for the eyes--don't know how I missed this. the simplicity of the imagery is soothing as your brain can just let you experience this on an intuitive level  beautiful!!

[WA Rodgers]

I really dislike explication....I think it leaves no room for the individual to access the work on their own terms....To me, it's like looking at illustrations vs looking at work....In the on-line presentation both scale and surface are missing: you cannot see the artist's hand, so to speak, which I find a little (just a little) offish. 

There is also the potential for false intimacy with the work on-line because the scale is automatically miniaturized - I'm only as far away as my arms can reach and my eyes can see....But here in this forum, because things are being mailed and handled, true intimacy with the work is at least possible for the maker and for the recipient.  I love to make small-scale work, and I love to make these to give to another someone.

I do think that sometimes an artist's statement can be helpful if taken as a means to access that person's thinking....I have two friends who run the opposite extremes when it comes to talking about their work....My friend David Dunlap's artist's statement is as complex, playful and interesting as his work - I think of it as parallel to the work, illuminating.

My friend, Rita, wants the viewer to "get" every idea - all the little inside jokes and whatnot within the work, so for her explication is primary.  I think of this as perpendicular to the work, and it leads to a dead-end for me as the viewer.

I'd much rather come at work that is clever, harsh, complex beyond reason, sloppy, flaky, goofy, aloof, self-injurious - work that steers me toward something (parallel), than I would to be directed for specific viewing (perpendicular) no matter how facile the execution.... Plus, sometimes when the artist wants me to understand some particular something, I think, well why not just tell me?  Did you really have to spend all this time making a meticulously beautiful rendition of this idea?

Maybe I just don't want to be bossed around my art experience as a viewer. I want to eat it up at my own pace and with my bare hands.

[De Villo Sloan]

Thanks for the link. Sometimes I don't know whether to read the artist's writing or not.

We have had many, many discussions at the IUOMA concerning the intention of the artist and/vs the response of the recipient. Know what I mean? Often work is interpreted in a completely different way than what the artist intended.

Of course it is a huge topic and has no resolution except on the individual level, but it always raises many ideas.

[WA Rodgers]

Thanks, friends...If you ever travel Facebook, I have a brief explanation of the thinking behind some of my work somewhere along with my work in one of the albums (that I put up for a photog pal).  I'm giving you links here for a couple of albums....

www.facebook.com/wendy.rodgers.733/photos_albums

(maybe I will post an artist's statement on my blog)

[De Villo Sloan]

Yes, congrats WA. The cryptic style is remarkable. Probably friends getting to know you will discover it's not cryptic at all. But until the code is cracked - very intriguing.

Hoping to find you at the PO today.

[Carina]

Congratulations on the exhibition WA. The exhibition/Options looked very interesting and your work is lovely!