tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20239079.post7660834743257163843..comments2024-03-04T04:12:57.650-05:00Comments on THEORY NOW: Sign-PainterMark Cameron Boydhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04697922195376438088noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20239079.post-6459158918469685772008-10-16T01:16:00.000-04:002008-10-16T01:16:00.000-04:00I didn't consider how the frame contributed to the...I didn't consider how the frame contributed to the sign. <BR/><BR/>Are there examples of other artists that use frames to give a painting the appearance of another object?<BR/><BR/>i vote that baldessari chose this frame. the hirshorn crew would not have dared to frame it because the purpose of the artwork at the Hirshorn is different from piece to piece... the paintings are not there to look nice. <BR/><BR/>i wonder if baldessari had intended you to notice the frame at all, or if you have just added richness to his artwork with your clever observation.Emily Chimiakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14484664806901356422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20239079.post-45772272262235244472008-10-07T11:24:00.000-04:002008-10-07T11:24:00.000-04:00I've been thinking about about John Baldessari's p...I've been thinking about about John Baldessari's painting since it was discussed on Friday. Well, actually I've been thinking more about the frame of "Exhibiting Paintings" more than the paint itself.<BR/><BR/><BR/>My curiosity piqued when a Hirshorn staff member told an anecdote about the painting. Apparently a museum patron complained to an employee about the typos on the sign downstairs. Hirshorn staff later realized the "sign" in question was in fact Baldessari's painting.<BR/><BR/>I can begin to see how the patron mistook that painting for a sign. For this confusion, I blame the frame.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Consider this: if the painting was hung sans frame, it would reveal itself as a canvas. A canvas then signals 'painting.'<BR/><BR/>If the frame existed by was thicker, more ornate, colored differently than that "landlord" yellow, it would read more as a 'frame.' A frame then signals with a painting is within it.<BR/><BR/><BR/>However, "Exhibiting Paintings" was a presented with neither of these options. It had a frame- but it was hardly noticeable. It is a thin, less than one inch thick, straight-edge, wood frame. It is a natural light wood color, somewhere between the white of the walls and yellow of the canvas.<BR/><BR/>Ultimately, it is rather aesthetically insignificant. I would not be surprised if I was the only one there who considered its role.<BR/><BR/>The frame did not have the presence of a frame. It was indeed more like a signpost that houses an informational sign.<BR/><BR/>I assert that, by removing or replacing the frame, "Exhibiting Paintings" would register more as an exhibited painting. (One that note: I think if this piece was more painting-like spectators would be more understanding of the "typos" - like <A HREF="http://larsenidealog.com/2007/08/28/%E2%80%9Cexhibiting-paintings%E2%80%9D-exhibits-typos/" REL="nofollow">this blogger</A> in particular.)<BR/><BR/><BR/>Now, the question is, who chose the frame? Is this frame part of the intellectual/aesthetic design of Baldessari himself? or a bizzaro choice by a Hirshhorn curator?Nikadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13994709061418916143noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20239079.post-25444063930377924082008-10-07T10:43:00.000-04:002008-10-07T10:43:00.000-04:00Many thanks for your kind words. Perhaps the "lan...Many thanks for your kind words. Perhaps the "landlord color" makes it "boring?" For more on the typos and a theory on their "cause-and-effect" visit <A HREF="http://larsenidealog.com/2007/08/28/%E2%80%9Cexhibiting-paintings%E2%80%9D-exhibits-typos/" REL="nofollow">this site</A>.Mark Cameron Boydhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04697922195376438088noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20239079.post-71278833427708900632008-10-07T00:00:00.000-04:002008-10-07T00:00:00.000-04:00your discussions here and at the museum are great....your discussions here and at the museum are great. clear and interesting.<BR/><BR/>when i returned from the museum talk, i was asked about the painting. 'very exciting!' 'what does it look like?' 'boring'<BR/><BR/>the painting is easy to overlook. it is bland in color and it is composed of commonly used symbols, a standard font. the painting forces you to read the words, because there is nothing to distract your eyes. the content of the message is equally unmemorable. <BR/><BR/>it is discussing the baldessari's idea that brings this painting to life. <BR/><BR/>i thought it was interesting that there are typos in the message. another laugh at the 'expert' how-to book?Emily Chimiakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14484664806901356422noreply@blogger.com