|
2 May 2005:
I found the piece above and three others that, like it, contain textual elements in the latest issue of ARTnews. It was not called a visual poem in the article discussing it. But it is presented as a painting, and contains near-words. Should we call it a visual poem, to return to my obsession with that damned term? At first, I couldn't justify not doing so. Then, I realized that what kept it from being a visual poem was that it was not a visual artwork! It was simply a text presented as an illumage (visual artwork to those not speaking Grummanese). A problem here was that I am on record as believing that context must be taken into consideration in defining what a work of art is, and that if something is presented as an artwork--framed, for instance (and not just called an artwork)--it is, however worthless an artwork it may be. Ergo, logic dictates that something one can see that is presented as an illumage must be taken as one.
So, my final position is that this is a portrait of a text, but not a poem. The text is mildly interested as a design, I guess. I have not been able to find it doing anything textually, verbally, poetically or visio-poetically interesting, though. If little soldiers, or words for little soldiers, came out of it, then I'd let it be called a visual poem, albeit a horrible one. I'd be very pleased if someone could point out to me what I'm missing, and I'm Very Capable of missing things.
In my up-to-date taxonomy which avoids the term "visual poetry," it's a textagraphic designage. So far.
Okay, I just looked at the thing on the screen, by itself, except for its caption. It looked better that way than it did in the magazine. I can now see it as a conceptual poem saying, "Don't worship language, for enemies coming out of the cracks in it may destroy you." It also speaks about packaging--the stenciling makes it a package. So I guess it's barely litagraph, I don't flow with the message I've found with it but like it well enough as a fairly striking design. Anyway, the fact that it is considered a painting in ARTnews, not a visual poem, is more evidence that "visual poem" is not the universal term for anything both visual and textual.
|
