Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msncom> wrote:
> Tek wrote:
> > I'm kinda hesitant about making such a sweeping criticism, but I've seen
> > this in a lot of images posted here: Personally I don't think the use of
> > text in an image can be considered minimalist,
>
> Yes it can
>
>
> particularly not if we're
> > talking about anything as complex as an entire 5 syllable word (or a
> > digital encoding thereof).
>
> Yes it can, I think Kawara's "Today Series" is "minimalist"
>
>
> >


I would agree that text can be used, but the Today/Date paintings were using
words and symbols that have become meaningless to us through sheer
commonplace-ity.  Kawara, I think, is trying to draw attention BACK to the
meaning, te glory of the words (This is largely my own interpretation. I
don't know myuch about the artist, other than his postcards: "I am still
alive. I woke up at...") So while the first impression is indeed
minimalist, there is a depth to his work, something beyond "What you see is
what you see." Certainly, though, encoding letters into numbers and
printing the numbers at an angle in a color is stretching the definition of
minimalism, and while cool looking, I don't think it is very similar to
Kawara's works.

Complexity is not disallowed, but there is a great amount of concern with
meaning going on around here than the more "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" of
minimalism. (Yes, I know Magritte was surreal. I'll live)

Whew! I'm in ranting mode this morning. You're getting there, St. Keep it up
;)


-s
5TF!

Post a reply to this message