Absolutely delighted to see the images of Jan Dibbets. I first saw his work 40 years or so ago in London & during all this time he has maintained a visual & artistic integrity of the highest order. I don't know how high his profile on the American art scene but should you ever have the chance to see his work for real I ask you not to miss the occasion.
I had the same thought as Kat, reminds of Gordon Matta Clark. Somehow though, this work is softer, and seems to have a completely different tone. I had never heard of Jan Dibbets before and I love these images. I want to see some in person. Thank you for the introduction!
Jeremiah, when you say that the work is 'softer' I think part of the reason may be found in the different approach between the two. Matta Clark was an interventionist in the true sense that he actually 'deconstructed' an object which existed whilst Dibbets constructs and de-constructs 'images' of what exist. Dibbet's approach is also more tied up with notions of perception & spatial ambiguity than recording an event. Although the photographic record of Matta Clark's actual interventions & the juxtaposition of one view point against another may ressemble Dibbet's images the latter's deconstruction & reassembly remain detached & are only 'real' in terms of the image - thus more conceptual than actual. Dibbets is also careful with use of tone & colour, underplayed though they may be, which is not perhaps a quality which would have had such a role with Matta Clark. I'm sure I've managed to make stupid remarks but just to cap it all I would suggest that Dibbet's 'distancing' stems more from a European tradition (cf.Dutch painting of domestic & church interiors) whilst Matta Clark is more in an American 'tradition' of bringing the 'physically' real within an art context (cf.Alan Kaprow & Robert Rauschenberg).
Tony, thanks for the overview. My art knowledge is superficial at best, and I think you did a good job contrasting the two. I actually did some photography work similar to Matta Clark for a seminar in college, but at the time I didn't know who he was (the professor did, but tried to avoid showing us actual examples until after the semester was over). You can take a look at it at http://jjohnson.carbonmade.com/projects/2257585 if you want. Thanks again.
.jpg){kind=link}
5 comments:
Absolutely delighted to see the images of Jan Dibbets. I first saw his work 40 years or so ago in London & during all this time he has maintained a visual & artistic integrity of the highest order. I don't know how high his profile on the American art scene but should you ever have the chance to see his work for real I ask you not to miss the occasion.
Wow! Makes me think of one of my favourite artists, Gordon Matta Clark.. Beautiful!
I had the same thought as Kat, reminds of Gordon Matta Clark. Somehow though, this work is softer, and seems to have a completely different tone. I had never heard of Jan Dibbets before and I love these images. I want to see some in person. Thank you for the introduction!
Jeremiah, when you say that the work is 'softer' I think part of the reason may be found in the different approach between the two. Matta Clark was an interventionist in the true sense that he actually 'deconstructed' an object which existed whilst Dibbets constructs and de-constructs 'images' of what exist. Dibbet's approach is also more tied up with notions of perception & spatial ambiguity than recording an event. Although the photographic record of Matta Clark's actual interventions & the juxtaposition of one view point against another may ressemble Dibbet's images the latter's deconstruction & reassembly remain detached & are only 'real' in terms of the image - thus more conceptual than actual. Dibbets is also careful with use of tone & colour, underplayed though they may be, which is not perhaps a quality which would have had such a role with Matta Clark. I'm sure I've managed to make stupid remarks but just to cap it all I would suggest that Dibbet's 'distancing' stems more from a European tradition (cf.Dutch painting of domestic & church interiors) whilst Matta Clark is more in an American 'tradition' of bringing the 'physically' real within an art context (cf.Alan Kaprow & Robert Rauschenberg).
Tony, thanks for the overview. My art knowledge is superficial at best, and I think you did a good job contrasting the two. I actually did some photography work similar to Matta Clark for a seminar in college, but at the time I didn't know who he was (the professor did, but tried to avoid showing us actual examples until after the semester was over). You can take a look at it at http://jjohnson.carbonmade.com/projects/2257585 if you want. Thanks again.
Post a Comment