Title: Breaking the Bank (Diptych), 2011
Media: Ceramic
Size: 11 x 17 in.
Breif Description:
The scaled down ceramic model of the bank being dropped is the Bank of America building located in downtown Houston, Texas.
Another acknowledgement is I lifted the format for these photos directly from Ai Weiwei:
I want to show this to all of you who have not seen this before in order to gather a brief description of what you make out of this piece. What questions are raised? Your immediate response would be the best. I am searching for keywords to write for a new statement.
Is the actual artwork the ceramic piece or the photographs depicting the act of dropping it? (media says ceramic, could be confusing)
ReplyDeleteI'm not familiar with Ai Wei Wei's work so I'm coming at this with no knowledge of what the concept behind his photographs were. But I'm wondering why you didn't do the third image (the bank actually broken) now that I've seen his triptych.
I like the shift between your hands in the two photographs, in the first of the two you really have a strong grip on the model, there's not really any indication that you are going to drop it. With that said, you're not holding it with care either. The photographs seem more about the action then the object itself.
I think the most successful aspect of the second photograph is the gaze. Naturally, when a person drops something they tend to look/ react to the thing being dropped. Gazing straight at the viewer while the model is dropping indicates (to me) that you don't care that this thing is about fall and crash on the ground -- it's not precious, or important. Also the way your hands are suspended in the air reinforces this lack of care. It doesn't look like you threw it down or accidentally dropped it. You just let it go with no interest in it's fall.
I question the importance of the first photo, I'm not saying it isn't successful I'm just wondering why you find it necessary to include, or why this piece needs to be a diptych. The main thing that draws me in is the fall/ drop of the object.
In retrospect I do appreciate that your gaze stays the same in both photographs. and that it's of no importance (to you) wether the model is held or dropped.
i agree with what (is this sarah?) is saying about the diptych vs. triptych issue. if you are making the ai wei wei reference, you cannot help but wonder WHY DONT WE SEE IT BREAK?! its driving me nuts, because now i am questioning my assumption that you are dropping the bank because its lack of importance to you, a.w.w. style with the ceramic vessels. because it could all be a lie! did you somehow save it at the last minute? this all feels crucial to me now...
ReplyDeletebut! going back to my original assumption, i really enjoy how detailed the model is, all the time you put into it, and then the action of dropping it. it holds the charge of value from a.w.w.'s piece, but it comes from a more personal history, since you made it and it's from houston, rather than a collective history. but also, the detail from the ceramic piece isn't readily available from these images, so i dont know if you want to address that or not.
aaaand i totally agree with everything sarah has said about the gaze. i like the gaze straight on.
-Lucy
Technically, I think they're strong. One thing that will kill images like these the a lack of continuity between them (lines matching up, the same tonal quality of the images, the positioning of the person or object). You did a good job at that.
ReplyDeleteThe main question I ask is this: How would someone seeing this for the first time know that the ceramic object is a bank? Is your title the only thing that tells us that. Are people unfamiliar with the building suppose to recognize it as a bank? Is there something you can do to the object that makes more of a symbol rather than a specific building. Is that even something you want to do? These are all just thoughts to consider and not questions that I necessarily need answered.
I think Lucy spoke about this because of the size. I think size is immensely important for these images, and I don't think that 11x17 can really serve it justice. They're far too small.
I suggest adding the third image of the broken bank as well - if even just to see what it looks like together. The title is "Breaking the Bank", but we don't see ANY broken bank. Are you playing with the audience? Are you doing it on purpose? Are you keeping the good stuff all to yourself?!?!? If you don't want us to see us - make me believe it is for a specific purpose. If you already have one - sell it to me.
-Justin
First, see: Re: Hands
ReplyDeleteI think it's also really important how you are holding the bank in the first image.
I would also like this if it were a video that loops over and over, but starts over right as the bank hits the ground. Maybe so you can see it crack, just barely.
I think it would also be stronger as a diptych if you remove the second image and replace it with one of the bank breaking, unless of course your intention is for the piece to evoke that annoying sense of having information withheld, which if that's the case it's mostly irrelevant that it's a bank, that it's ceramic, or that it's called "breaking the bank". Unless secondly that I'm missing a third layer of meaning here, like banks withholding information, banks being also giant evil corporations. But then I start wondering why the bank is so small and why you didn't make a giant model and throw something at it (answer: realistic limits), unless you see yourself as larger than banks/money. That stream of consciousness could probably easily continue, and either way, I like looking at this because it raises all of those flags in my mind, so for me it's a strong piece.
Justin, it's probably not my place to answer your question, but to answer it with a question, why would someone see the piece without also seeing the title (if they are actually looking at it)?
Also, to nitpick, the media is the photographic material, not ceramic.
-p
Where did this image, "Hands" come from? Seeing it makes me look at everything that's not the bank in the original diptych differently.
DeleteCan Donnie post a response to everyone's questions? I need answers!
I made it.
DeleteWhen I first saw this piece I immediately got the Aiweiwei reference. I'm not completely sure that three images are necessary. In aww's piece the third image acts as a period and ends the statement. But your second image leaves it open, it almost seems as if the bank could be suspended in your hand. We assume that it will break [gravity and the frgality of ceramic]so is the title revealing what will happen? Or is it ironic? Also in the first image, the way you hold the bank seems like maybe it is of some importance compared to aww and like lucy said you made the bank with great care. So you're breaking what you've made. I think the fact that it's raising so many questions is a good thing. And yes bigger too!
ReplyDelete