Response #3: Here. In Her Head: Cindy’s Disasters

November 12, 2008 | Comments Off on Response #3: Here. In Her Head: Cindy’s Disasters

-Joan Bowlen Perhaps a reframing of my definition would be helpful in this discussion of Cindy and the portrait.  Beginning last time as I did with such a limiting definition restricted the universal sense of the portrait which I want to engender.  Though the media for which the term “portrait” is most often applied exhibit […]

Response #2: “Disasters” as The Breaking Point

November 9, 2008 | Comments Off on Response #2: “Disasters” as The Breaking Point

– Peter Zimmerman You write, “I see the portrait as the framing of the human face within a 2-D plane, using the artist’s own emotive reading of the face in order to create a sense of the sitter.” I feel this coding of the portrait verges on the archaic, thereby not allowing for more plastic […]

Response

November 4, 2008 | Comments Off on Response

— Joan Bowlen I think the ability to read these images as portraits stems from a more wide spread idea of the role that the portrait plays. I see the portrait as the framing of the human face within a 2-D plane, using the artist’s own emotive reading of the face in order to create […]

– Peter Zimmerman While I can see the placement of identity as forefront and vital to the dialogue not only about Cindy Sherman but also that of portraiture in general, is there, potentially, something more that allows for the “Fairy Tales / Disasters” photographs to be seen as outside of the history of portraiture? I […]

-Joan Bowlen The portrait has consistently been a source of political, social, and emotional power throughout art history.  The towering trompe d’oils that littered halls and council rooms of the social elite perpetuated a sense of the sitter’s wealth at being able to commission such a display of material wealth and the generational collection of […]