What I like in Ron Mueck's work is not so much the "life-likeness" of the figures (that has been done and re-done). It is their dramatic character, their theatricality. They have their stories, personalities, they are not types of people (like Duane Hanson's characters often were).The pictures come from the Washington Post and have an added value: they create stories between the sculptures and the onlookers. This performative play, this superimposed dialogue, is a blessing - it takes our attention off the "look how real it looks" aspect and shows another level in the naturalistic technique.
Technorati:
5 comments:
Indeed...they remind me much of Viola's video works at the turn of the millennium on the passions.
I saw Muecks work a couple of times, I don't like it. He brings art and exhibition again closer to Circus and Flea market.Formally I find it also very bad.
I just love Ron Mueck's work. I saw him in Paris very recently at the Fondation Cartier where were exhibited the two sculptures you have in photo. I wrote an article in french on this exhibition on another blog:
http://neutral-art.over-blog.com/
I was quite disappointed when I finally bought the catalogue (i waited for it for about two months before it was published and sold)because I couldn't feel in the pictures what I had actually felt in front of the sculptures. They had become images and were much more distant. This is why I'm quite surprised to see these pictures here because I feel that they reveal Mueck's work more than those of the catalogue. I might be because oh a human presence. It was quite interesting to see how people reacted to Mueck sculptures as most of his sculptures are made in ordre to be presented to a public, they seek a certain dialogue.
I'm gonna stop now, I could go on about Meck for hours.
thank you
Mueck should work for Hollywood, Godzilla and Barbie, that would be the right place to impress the public with such virtouse. I hate it, not because of ugliness, but because of not setting mere artistic borders. Go instead into psychology or write another manifest. That it fascinates common people follows Muecks wrong understanding of the function of art.
Common folks of course always have a good nose, for whats good. But for me, his works misses the minimum artistic abstraction. Don't get to close to the people I would say in his case.
Oh, Hans, sometimes you scare with your absolute certainty about the right and "wrong understanding of the function of art".
Post a Comment