Response
Martin Puryear and Kendal Buster
Puryear
To me, Puryear's work can be defined as being non-representational. As a non-representational artist, much of his work has no real noticeable form and is left for viewer interpretation. A lot of his pieces rely on geometric form, aside from pieces like “Bask” and “Self”, which appear more organic. His sculpture tends to be very simplistic, though I noticed pieces like “Bower” and “The Charm of Subsistence” that seemed to stand out from the rest. They are more complex works and both have some noticeable form. I am partial to woodwork like this mostly for it's recognizable form and it's complexity. I believe that the pieces that are more thought-provoking tend to be those that are most complex. Some argue that the opposite is the case, but a piece of art that clearly shows some precision not only makes you question the story or intention behind it, but also the building process: how did the artist go about constructing this?
Buster
Buster's work doesn't rely so heavily on various media as Puryear does, but I believe that could prove to be a positive trait. For example, if someone were to show me one of Puryear's latest works without telling me that it was his, I might not have guessed that it was. Buster's work is different. It is more structural, more identifiable. Her choice of media is steel wire and transparent cloth. Like Puryear, much of her work is geometric. At first glance, her work is almost unreal. To me, the transparency of the figures can only be defined as ghostly. This aside, there is a piece called “Double Chalice” that holds a floral type of shape. Being reminiscent of a flower, it gives off a more playful tone. This piece, as with some of her other works, are hollowed chambers that visitors can enter. For this, I believe that the primary difference between Puryear and Buster is that Buster's work is more interactive while Puryear's is not. This is why I believe that Buster is more successful as an artist and designer.
No comments:
Post a Comment