Angiography by Norman Baker
If I have a purpose in writing these blogs, specifically during this exhibition, I believe it is only to deepen the confusion about these works. My question still stands, what makes these works art? For we’ve taken these pictures from the lab, placed them in a gallery, and called them art, with no real objection from anyone. I do not wish to object either, for there is a kind of artistic beauty in what I see.
The common objection thrown at these pieces is that there is a lack of artistic control in how the piece is created. We may find a nice rhythm or our eye drawn to what we may call the movement of the piece, but these seem to have emerged by chance and not choice. If this is true, and we understand the work in this way, the viewer is given a large advantage for their understanding of art.
For we have in front of us art which, in our understanding, has no real composer behind it, but still can be viewed aesthetically. The viewer in here can use this work to determine something of their own artistic sensibilities. What in these natural works draws our attention? What do I find most pleasing? When we view these works as artist-less, they become a platform for us to sound out our own natural sensibilities.
The Mitchell Gallery relies on community commitment, through generous individual donors and corporate memberships, to support its diverse exhibitions and programs.
We thank the following for their continuous funding and support: Anne Arundel County, Arts Council of Anne Arundel County, City of Annapolis, Helena Foundation, Maryland State Arts Council, Estate of Elizabeth Myers Mitchell, Mitchell Gallery Board of Advisors, Members of the Mitchell Gallery, Mrs. Ruth Mitchell, John and Hilda Moore Fund, National Endowment for the Arts, Lillian Vanous Nutt Mitchell Gallery Endowment, and the Clare Eddy and Eugene V. Thaw Fine Arts Fund.
Gifts in kind: Art Things, Inc. and Up.St.Art Annapolis Magazine.
—Will Harrington, SJC Student (A20)