We've featured one of Jennifer Zwick's photographs before (The Reader), but this one is too good to pass: The Explorers (2005), which celebrates the innate curiosity of every child to explore the world around, and in this case, beneath them.
We've featured one of Jennifer Zwick's photographs before (The Reader), but this one is too good to pass: The Explorers (2005), which celebrates the innate curiosity of every child to explore the world around, and in this case, beneath them.
http://www.kultureflash.net/archive/123/images/art_header.jpg
http://www.archidose.org/Apr03/untitled.jpg
http://www.artnet.com/magazine/features/tuchman/tuchman12-9-3.asp
Zwick is to Disneyland as Crewdson is to Mulholland Dr.
Zwick's image is a exploratory, youthful fantasy - the below-the-floor world is an inherent part of its narrative.
Neither artist is the first to wonder what is beneath us, or in our walls.
There is room for both photos in the world, for sure.
I hear you, but I don't think one photo is "better" than the other. They are simply describing completely different things.
@meg: Your comment makes me think that you maybe haven't made art before. When I was in school people were constantly making amazing, original, pieces. Months later they'd find out that somebody, somewhere, probably more famous, made something similar.
It also misses the point of making art in the first place: to explore and express ideas. If you compare what's going on in the photos, they're very very different. In Zwicks photo the girls are consciously going forth and exploring the unknown! That dude in Crewdsons photo has no idea of the nether regions beneath. Kinda looks like he just wants to get a clot of hair out or something.
By saying one is better than the other I agree that this can not really be appropriate words to describe the two pieces. The two are just in different leagues.
Because two artists create something similar in no way means that one is an imitation of the other. If you'd take a stroll down art history-lane you'd realize that. Your assumptions are that she is copying when you have no idea if she's copying or not, other than your superior intellect of course.
Have you bothered to read her artist statement? (Go on, run off and read it so you can respond with a witty come back).
Whether you like something or not has no bearing on its validity or worth -- it's simply your opinion, backed up only by off-hand and nonsensical references to other artists that you dislike. If you have a problem with Anne Geddes and Sherry Levine so much, write them a letter and let them know.
I happen to like this photo a lot, as well as a lot of her other work. The difference, of course, is that I understand that it's my *opinion* that it's good, and our opinions are nothing more than that. I don't like the work because I like similar pieces by other artists -- I like the photo in itself.