Hi, > Here's another from our day at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. I > don't know if it needs a title, but a few crossed my mind ... anyway, > regardless of what it's called, maybe you'll find it interesting or worthy > of a second look
> http://home.earthlink.net/~sbelinkoff/sfmoma2.html sometimes I think a title is the photographer's (or scultor's, or painter's, or ... (I can't bring myself to use the "A" word)) way of beating their audience about the head, or forcing an opinion on them. I think this is one of those cases. A friend of mine who is a sculptor and jewellery maker had a couple of very nice pieces in an exhibition a couple of years ago. They were glass scultpures in cases, and each worked as a series, like film frames. Piece #1 started with 2 red glass hearts hanging next to each other on threads. The 2nd part showed one heart. In the 3rd part the heart was shattered in pieces on the floor of the case. This piece was untitled. Piece #2 started with 2 tall, identical shards of glass next to each other. In part 2 one of the shards was shattered in pieces on the floor of the case, while the other shard was intact. In part 3 both shards lay shattered. The first piece sold within about 3 seconds of the exhibition opening, and was hugely popular. The second piece she called "9/11", and it seemed much less popular. I told her off about the title because I thought she should let her audience figure it out for themselves, rather than forcing it on them, and telling them what to think. When she removed the title, it sold. Give your audience something to do! -- Cheers, Bob
