Hussein Chalayan is an artist and designer, working in film, dress and installation art. Research Chalayan’s work, and then consider these questions in some thoughtful reflective writing.
1. Chalayan’s works in clothing, like Afterwords (2000) andBurka (1996) , are often challenging to both the viewer and the wearer. What are your personal responses to these works? AreAfterwords and Burka fashion, or are they art? What is the difference?
Not all clothing is fashion, so what makes fashion fashion?
I must be missing something here, I don't see the 'challenge' in Afterwords. It just seems like the sorta fashion item you'd see on a catwalk. Personally I don't really get nor desire to understand much about fashion, being a male who's dress sense barely outdoes that of a snazzy caveman, it's not really my cup of tea, however looking at Afterwords I don't see anything but a fashion piece. Burka on the otherhand speaks to me almost about the contrast and progression of fashion throughout the ages, or that of western civilisation and eastern civilisation; the scantily clad bikini wearers of california contrasted with the full body gowns of eastern countries. It almost seems like the contemporary art of the fashion world, however the line between fashion and art isnt so easy to distinguish.
Hussein Chalayan, Burka, 1996
Hussein Chalayan, Afterwords, 20002. Chalayan has strong links to industry. Pieces like The Level Tunnel (2006) and Repose (2006) are made in collaboration with, and paid for by, commercial business; in these cases, a vodka company and a crystal manufacturer. How does this impact on the nature of Chalayan’s work? Does the meaning of art change when it is used to sell products? Is it still art?
Just like you could say there are artistic elements in fashion, I believe it would be fair to say that you can have artistic elements in advertising. While some would say it detracts from the meaning of the piece that it was paid for and collaborated with by big companies, I think that ultimately that is better then the piece not having the funds and ending up not getting the message across. To me its like someone handing you a new fancy paintbrush and saying in exchange, make me a picture. I think to an extent however much art can be used to advertise products, I don't want to see it head in a direction that TV and Movies similarly have, in that to be able to finance the final outcome, product placement has been littered around the piece itself. Could you imagine the Mona Lisa holding a can of coke?
3. Chalayan’s film Absent Presence screened at the 2005 Venice Biennale. It features the process of caring for worn clothes, and retrieving and analysing the traces of the wearer, in the form of DNA. This work has been influenced by many different art movements; can you think of some, and in what ways they might have inspired Chalayan’s approach?
Hussein Chalayan, still from Absent Presence, 2005 (motion picture)
The first image that came to my mind from "caring for worn clothes, and retrieving and analysing the traces of the wearer, in the form of DNA" was some form of CSI:Clothes, that the mistreatment and abandonment of these previously loved clothes was something of a crime and the previous owners are being tracked down forensic style. Even the image seems like it, with the clothes lieing on an operating table and someone peering in anxiously, so you could almost say her work had been influenced by the recent pop culture boom in shows such as CSI and Law and Order, with forensic work and crimes and the such. However in terms of art movements, you could say its almost like a surrealist work, the idea of clothes being treated like people in an ECU seems like something I would dream of, something crazy and nonsensical from the back of my mind.
4. Many of Chalayan’s pieces are physically designed and constructed by someone else; for example, sculptor Lone Sigurdsson made some works from Chalayan’s Echoform (1999) and Before Minus Now (2000) fashion ranges. In fashion design this is standard practice, but in art it remains unexpected. Work by artists such as Jackson Pollock hold their value in the fact that he personally made the painting. Contrastingly, Andy Warhol’s pop art was largely produced in a New York collective called The Factory, and many of his silk-screened works were produced by assistants. Contemporarily, Damien Hirst doesn’t personally build his vitrines or preserve the sharks himself. So when and why is it important that the artist personally made the piece?
I personally think there is an importance in the artist actually making the work themselves, its one thing to create an idea, but not actually creating the piece yourself doesn't seem right in my mind. Art to me is an expression, and its not the same if someone else is expressing it for you. Especially in the cases of Hirst where even though often the only contribution to a piece he has is signing his name to it, and all the credit of the piece goes to him because "he came up with the concept" I believe is compelete bullshit. Personally I think the artist is the one that creates the work, the person who thought of the idea has almost nothing to do with it, more like a starting point for the real artist.
We learnt in class today MATT (you would know if you were there haha) that the performance piece, 'Afterwords' had a very interesting meaning behind it. If you look at the video of it:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CE07_aFF4no
the characters in the piece are seen taking the slips off the furniture and where them and then packing the chairs up into a suitcase and carrying them. Next the women (in the still we are given) appears in the middle of the coffee table and she then starts pull the table onto her like a dress. The artists idea and thinking of this came from war and how when they had to evacuate they were only allowed to take with them what they were wearing. Thus creating furniture which is wearable and portable, so they were able to take with them the contents in their homes.
It's interesting to hear the comparison of bikini wearing Californians, especially with Katie Perry's song haha. But really, there's quite a difference between a bikini and nothing (even if the amount of fabric is a small one)
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the paintbrush analogy, I think it's more like 'make me a picture, but a picture that I will appreciate'. It's limiting, but yeah, better than nothing I guess.
Nice interpretation of the Absent Presence; it's weird how it's like, mild surrealism.
Another good article though, please write the next one so I can borrow ideas- I mean comment on it!
I never thought of realating Absent Presence with CSI, that is quite clever. It does look like a scene from CSI or any detective programme now that i think about it. I also agree with your opinion on the topic of art and whether or not the artist should get full credit for a piece that they did not make themselves. I think anyone can come up with weird and wonderful ideas that could be great art pieces however if they can't make it themselves then how can it be their art? That's why people hire graphic designers or any type of designer really, the customer gives the designer a starting point, saying what they would like, what is the purpose etc and the designer works with that, because the customer cannot do it for himself or herself.
ReplyDeleteI agree your posting. I also think in artists case, an important thing is making own work themselves.
ReplyDeleteEven though ideas also can be important thing, if they can make own work themselves they have already understand-ed their idea and purpose. Think about that someone copy other's work. I think if someone can make it as own thing that is not bad. That can be your.
Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging symbolic elements in a way that influences and affects the senses, emotions, and intellect. As a artist, i think creating and experimenting and making piece is most important because art is not just about the result, it is about the process, a piece of work is not just a object, but a piece of work that contains lots of meanings behind and how to present can bring audience different feelings and thoughts by different artists.
ReplyDeleteI think it's a little sad if the artist doesn't make there pieces themselves...but i guess it doesn't really matter, obviously if famous artists don't. I think it's more about the art and what there trying to say. I don't think i've ever thought to myself..'i wonder if the artist actually made this themselves'. At first i didn't quite understand 'Afterwords (2000)' but thought the skirt was pretty cool. Then realized that it actually transformed into a table.....Amazing!. This is such a great idea, but it makes it very difficult to pick a side when determining whether it is art or fashion.
ReplyDeleteThat's food for thought! I can't imagine what controversy would spark from the idea of the Mona Lisa holding a Coke can, but it would be a very sucessful advertising strategy. Using an already famous piece of art- combine it with a consumer product and it does show creative elements of advertising. I agree with you, communicating the message to the audience should be the primary concern for artists!
ReplyDelete