terry smith – Acetylene Eyes

Joseph Kosuth – Art as Idea as Idea {Meaning} (1967)

The above is one work referenced in art historian Terry Smith’s essay One And Three Ideas: Conceptualism Before, During and After Conceptual Art for E-Flux #29. (November 2011)

It’s written in an overly academic style–that I find supremely off-putting. Usually, that style of writing has the advantage of being nominally clear. This gets damn near tautological in places.

It does make some interesting points, though. The notion that the term ‘conceptual’ was in place and fairly well codified ahead of its critical deployment is well taken.

I was unfamiliar with any of the works he chose to feature–and I’m intrigued by his thesis regarding the far ranging impact of Moscow Romantic Conceptualism on modern Russian Art.

The other issue is that I am not convinced you can talk about the ‘conceptual’, conceptual art and/or ‘conceptualism’ without a broad cross genre analysis–for example there’s parenthetical mention of Acconci, but little else along that track. Also, he rightly includes Jeff Wall–but overlooks Alfredo Jaar.

I recommend it–even if it’s only for the myriad points of departure it offers. (And that’s the only thing I really miss about academia…)

Source: e-flux.com

Terry Smith – Nick’s beautiful long legs [frame #2]; San Diego, California from Hotel & Motel series (2017)

Do it or don’t do it — you will regret both.
—Søren Kierkegaard, Either/Or (via wordsnquotes)

Source: americasfinestkids

Terry Smith – Cory on the rooftop of LeStat’s here in San Diego, California (2006)

This isn’t an image you’d ever claim was ‘good’; the focus is soft, the pose is awkward given the composition (or the composition is awkward given the pose–flip a coin) and although it’s less frequently imposed in creating male nudes, this orientation is inherently tied up in an art historical tendency of the body as object, i.e. the dominant eye standing above a supine figure.

All that being said, it is interesting because everything I just finished criticizing is what ultimately makes the image interesting–the soft focus causes the the boy’s skin to stand out against the filthy rooftop, the pose is neither full passive nor entirely active (due to the right leg being elevated off the ground and the objectification is clearly a primary impetus for the picture’s creation.

Also, I’m taken with this because while I’ve never been to LeStat’s, several of my friends do frequent it and speak fondly of the place.

Source: americasfinestkids