The Necessity of Words
All visual artists need words. The word, whether written or spoken is the conduit that brings understanding in a deeper, more conscious way. We put photographs on the crit rail and what do we do? We talk about them. Occasionally we write about our work, in stumbling, jumbled prose we attempt to convey to others what our work means to us. Shouldn’t it be enough to let the photograph speak for itself? Do we not believe that our work has a voice of it’s own without adding ‘traditional’ language to the mix? I cannot deny that words do indeed help us clarify our own intention, but I still wonder why the photograph isn’t enough. Part of me wants to believe that there is work out there that does not require words to validate it’s existence. Some may point out the work of the great masters-that those works stand on their own, but our understanding of these works come from what has been written by others, so the question remains; is there intrinsic power inside a photograph that can negate the need for words?
January 31st, 2009 at 3:06 pm
I hate this problem. I think photographs do speak and can stand on their own to a certain extent but there isn’t any guarantee that anyone will pick up on the specific meaning you’ve tried to convey. I’m still caught up in the romance of the photograph and I desperately want it to be enough… but I don’t know if it really is. It just makes me so sad.
May 4th, 2010 at 4:09 am
Извиняюсь, ничем не могу помочь, но уверен, что Вам помогут найти правильное решение….
All visual artists need words. The word, whether written or spoken is the conduit that brings understanding in a deeper, more conscious way…..