Convocation Reflection

I don’t know if I like Alexandria Bell's work. She messes with text and newspapers to draw attention to how public narratives are constructed. However, she comes from a journalistic background, and I think it shows. Her edited New York Times covers don’t have a lot of visual interest – at least to my eyes – and to understand what she is doing, I think you have to read about her work or attend a lecture about it. If that’s the case, I don’t know why she wouldn't just cut out the middleman and write an essay. I know she said she's not super interested in doing that – she mentioned she doesn’t want to work at a paper, she isn’t a journalist, etc. – but to me, it feels like her critiques could be better expressed through straightforward writing. When she was still wheat pasting her images, I’m guessing they had a greater impact, and in the Q&A, she basically said as much. But I also recognize that it is a lot easier to feed yourself as an artist when you can frame and sell your work.

Comments

  1. Yeah, I kind of felt like her journalistic background showed through more than she intended it to. I know she said she's not a journalist and doesn't want to be, but her art did kind of feel like journalism to me. I definitely also understood her work a lot better after seeing the convocation, and I'm glad I did go to see it before going to the talk. I thought it was neat.
    (Also, I don't remember what you asked her but I remember thinking it was a good question!)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think her work is definitely more interesting to think about than to look at a lot of the time, although I really like the marginal writing. I also wish her work was still wheat pasted.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Non Euclidean

Another Transfiguration