![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
One of the things that often peeves me about art is when the artist leaves us high and dry and titles their work with "Untitled". It's even more fun when they do numerous untitled works. It makes it really fun to talk about them with friends.
A: "I really love what Still did with Untitled. The contrasts were stunning."
B: "Oh, totally. Wait, did you mean untitled 1957 or 1960?"
A: "Shit. It's the one that's mostly black with tiny splotches of white and yellow, with a little blotch of red in the lower right."
B: "Oh, right. I found the one with mostly white, less black, small hints of yellow and a streak of red on the right."
A:"You must have seen it upside down. The red was on the left when I saw it."
B:"Oh, that changes things."
So, not only does it make it difficult to discuss art efficiently, but it really takes the artist's intent out of it. Sure, you can try to pay attention to context clues, but in the arena of Modern art, it's a lot more of a challenge. Is it so wrong to ask for a clue with the title? Or if not a clue, just name it something. Anything. Disenteri. I don't care. At least we wouldn't have to haggle over untitled 1960 versus 1957, and in the case of Prolific "Untitlers", you're totally screwed unless you're a numbers savant.
Take the following by Clifford Still, entitled Untitled, 1960:
I understand that this type of art is more about how you the perceiver experiences the colors. However, I find my self spending time wondering why this took somoene all year to paint. I guess I'm not factoring in drying time.
Now, I have a lot more appreciation for something like James' Rosenquist's "Leaky Ride for Doctor Leakey" (you'll have to navigate to the right painting). Small parts of a woman's face, menacing #2 pencils, copper hardware. Sure, I wonder if Doctor Leaky presides over the Urinary Dysfunction conferences, but that's all part of the fun. The images are stunning, and fascinating to look at for a while, and I don't have to get pissed off over the whole "Untitled" issue. Nothing about the painting strikes me as Leaky, or ride-related. But we have a title, and it's easy to remember.
However, he does have some untitled works, the prat.
A: "I really love what Still did with Untitled. The contrasts were stunning."
B: "Oh, totally. Wait, did you mean untitled 1957 or 1960?"
A: "Shit. It's the one that's mostly black with tiny splotches of white and yellow, with a little blotch of red in the lower right."
B: "Oh, right. I found the one with mostly white, less black, small hints of yellow and a streak of red on the right."
A:"You must have seen it upside down. The red was on the left when I saw it."
B:"Oh, that changes things."
So, not only does it make it difficult to discuss art efficiently, but it really takes the artist's intent out of it. Sure, you can try to pay attention to context clues, but in the arena of Modern art, it's a lot more of a challenge. Is it so wrong to ask for a clue with the title? Or if not a clue, just name it something. Anything. Disenteri. I don't care. At least we wouldn't have to haggle over untitled 1960 versus 1957, and in the case of Prolific "Untitlers", you're totally screwed unless you're a numbers savant.
Take the following by Clifford Still, entitled Untitled, 1960:
I understand that this type of art is more about how you the perceiver experiences the colors. However, I find my self spending time wondering why this took somoene all year to paint. I guess I'm not factoring in drying time.
Now, I have a lot more appreciation for something like James' Rosenquist's "Leaky Ride for Doctor Leakey" (you'll have to navigate to the right painting). Small parts of a woman's face, menacing #2 pencils, copper hardware. Sure, I wonder if Doctor Leaky presides over the Urinary Dysfunction conferences, but that's all part of the fun. The images are stunning, and fascinating to look at for a while, and I don't have to get pissed off over the whole "Untitled" issue. Nothing about the painting strikes me as Leaky, or ride-related. But we have a title, and it's easy to remember.
However, he does have some untitled works, the prat.
