Last night while commenting to the artist on her work she exclaimed, " I hope no one takes the Polaroids!" For the uninitiated this was in reference to Polaroid's demise and the scarcity of said film. ( Maybe she hadn't heard that Polaroid was back in business, but that would ruin this posting).
Anyway, it started me thinking about when is a photograph, (Polaroid included), painting or any other medium, art and not just the end product of someone's creativity? Maybe it's when someone other than the creator acquires the piece and displays it for others to admire. Or maybe the infamy of the person creating the work automatically makes it so. The above photograph was taken at a house about to be demolished. If the paintings weren't photographed and no one but the painter saw them were they art?
Was she keeping the Polaroids from becoming art by not letting others acquire them? Or is art just art for art's sake? Something to think about next time you think about filling the empty space on the wall behind your couch.
I'd love to own this art. May I buy a print, please? Missy
ReplyDelete